alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| Subsidiary                                                        |   | State                  of                  Incorporation |   | Doing                  Business AS                                |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                              |   |                                                     |   |                                                              |
| Homeland                  Security Strategies, Inc.               |   | Delaware                                                 |   | Homeland                  Security Strategies, Inc.               |
| Homeland                  Security Strategies of California, Inc. |   | California                                               |   | Homeland                  Security Strategies of California, Inc. |
| Homeland                  Security Strategies of Florida, Inc.    |   | Florida                                                  |   | Homeland                  Security Strategies of Florida, Inc     |
| Homeland                  Security Strategies (UK), Ltd.          |   | London,                  UK                              |   | Homeland                  Security Strategies (UK), Ltd.          |
| HSS                  Express Funds, Inc.                          |   | New                  York                                |   | HSS                  Express Funds, Inc.                          |

----
# L_2009278EN.01005901.xml

| 23.10.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 278/59 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.10.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 278/59

---

COMMISSION DECISION

of 22 October 2009

fixing the net amounts resulting from the application of voluntary modulation in Portugal for calendar years 2010, 2011 and 2012

(notified under document C(2009) 8031)

(Only the Portuguese text is authentic)

(2009/780/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 378/2007 of 27 March 2007 laying down rules for voluntary modulation of direct payments provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Decision 2008/788/EC (2) has fixed the net amounts resulting from the application of voluntary modulation in Portugal for the calendar years 2009 to 2012. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Decision 2008/788/EC (2) has fixed the net amounts resulting from the application of voluntary modulation in Portugal for the calendar years 2009 to 2012.

| (2) | Portugal has communicated to the Commission that, as a result of the unforeseen difficulties provoked to its agricultural sector by the ongoing economic crisis and the negative impact on the economic situation of farmers, it has decided not to apply voluntary modulation for the calendar year 2009. Portugal has decided to retain the single national voluntary rate of 10 % for the calendar years 2010, 2011 and 2012. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Portugal has communicated to the Commission that, as a result of the unforeseen difficulties provoked to its agricultural sector by the ongoing economic crisis and the negative impact on the economic situation of farmers, it has decided not to apply voluntary modulation for the calendar year 2009. Portugal has decided to retain the single national voluntary rate of 10 % for the calendar years 2010, 2011 and 2012.

| (3) | For reasons of clarity it is therefore appropriate to repeal and replace Decision 2008/788/EC, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

For reasons of clarity it is therefore appropriate to repeal and replace Decision 2008/788/EC,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The net amounts resulting from the application of voluntary modulation in Portugal for the calendar years 2010, 2011 and 2012 shall be as follows:

| (EUR million) |
| --- |
| 2010 | 2011 | 2012 |
| 29,0 | 25,0 | 21,0 |

(EUR million)

2010

2011

2012

29,0

25,0

21,0

Article 2

Decision 2008/788/EC is repealed.

Article 3

This Decision shall apply as from budget year 2011.

Article 4

This Decision is addressed to the Portuguese Republic.

Done at Brussels, 22 October 2009.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 95, 5.4.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 271, 11.10.2008, p. 44.

2

---
389 P.2d 692

#### The STATE of Arizona ex rel. Milton J. HUSKY, State Treasurer of the State of Arizona, and Allen H. Rhodes, the Registrar of Contractors of the State of Arizona, Appellants, v. Robert W. FRANKLIN and Lellah M. Franklin, husband and wife, dba Rentcenter, Appellees.

No. 8222.

Supreme Court of Arizona, En Banc.

Feb. 27, 1964.

Robert W. Pickrell, Atty. Gen., and Robert S. Murlless, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellants.

Scruggs & Rucker, Tucson, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Robert W. Franklin and Lellah M. Franklin, husband and wife, dba Rent-center, plaintiffs sued defendant Olympic Pools, Inc., an Arizona corporation, on a contract, and Milton J. Husky, State Treasurer of the State of Arizona, who held a cash deposit for the corporation in lieu of a contractor’s bond. No answer on behalf of either defendant being filed, on September 20, 1963 a default judgment was entered for plaintiffs against both defendants. A subsequent motion to set aside the default and judgment was denied. From the judgment and the order denying the motion to set aside, defendants appealed.

Thereafter appellants filed with the Clerk a designation of contents of the record on appeal and in due course the record on appeal was transmitted to the Clerk of the Supreme Court on the 23rd day of January, 1964.

On the 3rd day of February 1964 the Clerk of the Supreme Court filed a letter from the attorney for appellees in which it was stated, “My clients, Mr. and Mrs. Robert W. Franklin, have advised me that they do not wish to contest the appeal in Cause No. 8222 filed by the Attorney Gen*286eral of the State of Arizona.” This we consider a confession of error. Therefore the judgment and order of the trial court are reversed, and the matter is remanded to the Superior Court of Pima County for such further proceedings as the Court may deem proper under the law.
# Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas

November 18, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00342

- CV

VILLA DIJON CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.

and Implicity Management Company,

Appe llant s

v.

Mary WINTERS and Mila Cheatom,

Appellee s

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015

- CI

- 03926 Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

This court granted Appellant’s first motion for extension of time to file the brief, and Appellant’s brief was due to be filed on November 10 , 201 5

. On November 12, 2015, Appellant filed (1) an unopposed second motion for an extension of time to file the brief , and (2) Appellant’s brief.

Appellant’s motion is GRANTED. Appellant’s brief is deemed timely filed. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P. 38.6(d).

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said
court on this 18th day o f November, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle
Clerk of Court
**Exhibit 31****CERTIFICATION**I, **David F. Sand,**certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Access Capital Strategies CommunityInvestment Fund Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this quarterly report; 4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis quarterly report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report(the “Evaluation Date”); and  c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of Evaluation Date;5. I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors: a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controlswhich could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any materialweaknesses in internal controls; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; and6. I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internalcontrols or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent tothe date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard tosignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses.October 7, 2005    /s/ David F. Sand   David F. Sand
(October 22, 1987)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Granville Bost, Appellant.

Weiss, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Columbia County (Leaman, J.), rendered May 13, 1985, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of assault in the second degree and attempted escape in the third degree, and the offense of disorderly conduct.

Defendant was convicted after a jury trial of assault in the second degree, attempted escape in the third degree and disorderly conduct following a series of altercations with two City of Hudson police officers on June 2, 1984. On this appeal, defendant maintains that he was deprived of a fair trial in that the officers were allowed to testify that he acted under the influence of cocaine, an assertion constituting inadmissible evidence of an uncharged crime. Upon our review of the record, we find the contention without merit.

Defendant acknowledges that it was entirely acceptable for both officers to express an opinion as to defendant’s intoxication to explain his erratic behavior *(see,*Richardson, Evidence § 364 [h], at 332-333 [Prince 10th ed]). Defendant maintains, however, that the officers were not qualified to hypothecate that he acted under the influence of a particular illegal substance, i.e., cocaine, for such testimony raised the spectre of an uncharged crime. The People concede that these officers were unqualified to identify defendant’s use of a particular substance *(see, People v Kenny,*30 NY2d 154, 156-157). The purport of their testimony, however, was not to identify a specific drug, but simply to explain defendant’s behavior. Moreover, the only specific reference to cocaine use occurred in response to an inquiry from County Court as follows:

> "Q. Was his behavior such that according to your experience you would conclude it was the behavior of an intoxicated individual?

> "A. Not so much as far as alcohol intoxication. My feeling was that he was very high on cocaine. That was consistent with the way you would act if you were that drugged up.”

Although no objection was raised, County Court cautioned the jury that defendant was not on trial for substance abuse and that the officer’s testimony was relevant only insofar as it pertained to defendant’s behavior. We find that the instruction adequately dissipated any prejudice *(see, People v De Mauro,*48 NY2d 892, 893). And while defendant complains that the court failed to render an appropriate charge on the *931use of this testimony, no pertinent requests to charge were made and no exception was taken to the charge given *(see, supra).*No trial is perfect, and our review of the entire record confirms that the reference to cocaine use was not so prejudicial as to have deprived defendant of a fair trial *(see, People v Kingston,*8 NY2d 384, 387; *People v Lester,*99 AD2d 611, 612).

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Mikoll and Harvey, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      18,009,544
<SECURITIES>                                 8,710,744
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            27,074,992
<PP&E>                                       5,834,923
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,580,790
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              29,376,425
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,244,554
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  5,088,947
<COMMON>                                       132,009
<OTHER-SE>                                  21,516,458
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                29,376,425
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,325,864
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               14,797,575
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (13,471,711)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (13,471,711)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (13,471,711)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.05)
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: 

DESIGNATION OF CHAIR OF MINOR 

COURT RULES COMMITTEE

:

:

:

:

NO. 401

MAGISTERIAL DOCKET

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 20th day of July, 2016, Magisterial District Judge Anthony W. 

Saveikis is hereby designated as Chair of the Minor Court Rules Committee

commencing August 28, 2016.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5720 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

1227 Lunalilo Street, Honolulu, Hawaii, as the ‘‘Cecil L. Heftel Post 

Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 13, 2010 

Mr. DJOU introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 1227 Lunalilo Street, Honolulu, Hawaii, as 

the ‘‘Cecil L. Heftel Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. CECIL L. HEFTEL POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 1227 Lunalilo Street, Honolulu, 

6 Hawaii, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Cecil L. 

7 Heftel Post Office Building’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5720 IH

1 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

2 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Cecil L. Heftel Post 

3 Office Building’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
---

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, David She, the Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer of AMERICAN LORAIN CORPORATION (the Company), DO HEREBY CERTIFY
that:

| | 1. | The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
      year ended December 31, 2010 (the Report), fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                   
| | 2. | Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
      all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of
      the Company.                                                       

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this
statement this 2nd day of May 2011.

/s/ David She David She Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to American Lorain Corporation and will be retained by
American Lorain Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to §18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. Dennis E. AXLEY, Private, U. S. Army, Appellant.

No. 31,065.

U. S. Court of Military Appeals.

Jan. 16, 1976.

*Colonel Alton H. Harvey, Captain Michael R. Caryl,*and *Captain John M. Nolan*were on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*266
      *Captain Richard S. Kleager*and *Captain Larry R. McDowell*were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

OPINION

COOK, Judge:

Review was granted to determine whether, on the basis of the allegations of the specifications and the evidence, the accused could be separately punished for wrongful sale and wrongful possession of marihuana. The chain of evidence which led to the charges indicates the offenses are not separately punishable. *United States v. Smith,*1 M.J. 260 (1976). Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Military Review as to the sentence is reversed. The record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army for resubmission to the court for reassessment of the sentence in light of this opinion.

Senior Judge FERGUSON concurs in the result.

FLETCHER, Chief Judge

(concurring in the result):

I concur. See my separate opinion in *United States v. Smith,*1 M.J. 260 (1976).
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2662 

To amend title 37, United States Code, to clarify the situations in which 

the United States will cover the cost of transportation for next of kin 

to attend the transfer ceremony of a member of the Armed Forces 

who dies overseas. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 4, 2015 

Mr. FRANKS of Arizona (for himself, Mr. SALMON, Mr. GALLEGO, and Ms. 

SINEMA) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 37, United States Code, to clarify the situations in which the United States will cover the cost 

of transportation for next of kin to attend the transfer 

ceremony of a member of the Armed Forces who dies 

overseas. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fallen Heroes Family 

5 Assistance Act’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2662 IH

1 SEC. 2. GUARANTEED TRANSPORTATION FOR NEXT OF KIN 

2 TO ATTEND TRANSFER CEREMONY OF MEM3 BERS OF THE ARMED FORCES WHO DIE 

4 OVERSEAS. 

5 Section 481f(e) of title 37, United States Code, is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), and 

8 (4) as paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), respectively; and 

9 (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the fol10 lowing new paragraph (2): 

11 ‘‘(2) The discretion to authorize transportation under 

12 paragraph (1) shall not apply, and the Secretary of the 

13 military department concerned is instead required to pro14 vide such transportation, whenever the death of the mem15 ber overseas occurs in the line of duty in a combat or hu16 manitarian relief operation or in combat zone designated 

17 by the Secretary of Defense.’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.2


                            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 eLinear, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange  Commission  on  the  date  hereof  (the "Report"), I, Ramzi M. Nassar,
Principal  Financial and Accounting 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  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 Company.



/s/ Ramzi M. Nassar
-----------------------------------
Ramzi M. Nassar,
Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
November 15, 2004


     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to eLinear, Inc. and will be retained by eLinear, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


<PAGE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1



The Board of Directors
Petsec Energy Ltd


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (No. 333-6128) of Petsec Energy Ltd of our report dated March 31,
1999, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Petsec Energy Ltd and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997 and 1998 and the related consolidated
statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss) and cash flows for the
year ended June 30, 1996, the six month period ended December 31, 1996 and for
each of the years in the two year period ended December 31, 1998, which report
appears in the December 31, 1998 annual report on Form 20-F of Petsec Energy
Ltd.



KPMG



Sydney, Australia
June 10, 1999