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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         377,665
<SECURITIES>                                    10,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  868,949
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    822,252
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,301,546
<PP&E>                                       1,117,655
<DEPRECIATION>                                 206,559
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,428,340
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,018,812
<BONDS>                                        288,863
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,431
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,117,234
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,428,340
<SALES>                                        913,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               913,000
<CGS>                                          962,156
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  962,156
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               928,154
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,008
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (983,318)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (983,318)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (983,318)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.29)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AT MARCH 31, 2000 AND THE RELATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE THREE
MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<CIK>   0001043236
<NAME>  ELDER TRUST
<MULTIPLIER>   1000
<CURRENCY>     U.S.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                               2,677
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       50,407
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     5,568
<PP&E>                                             181,900
<DEPRECIATION>                                      11,629
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     263,734
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                3,439
<BONDS>                                             20,076
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                71
<OTHER-SE>                                         101,749
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       263,734
<SALES>                                              7,004
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     7,004
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        1,748
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       706
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   3,387
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        516
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    516
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                           516
<EPS-BASIC>                                           0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.07



</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                   Exhibit 10.67


                                  Addendum # 3
                        To Log Sales Contract # 11-21-01
                             dated November 27, 2000

                                  May 10, 2001

Closed Joint-Stock Company "Forest-Starma" hereinafter referred to as the Seller
and Rayonier Inc., hereinafter referred to as the Buyer, have entered into the
present Addendum #3 with respect to the following:

     1.   The following changes shall be made to the Contract #11-21-01 dated
          November 21, 200 in paragraph 1 "Subject of the Contract":

The Seller agrees to sell and the buyer agrees to buy, on terms contained in the
Contract and individual addenda to this Contract, al the spruce, white fir,
larch and broad-leaved logs, produced by the Seller, as provided in this
Contract.

     2.   Other terms of the present Contract and individual addenda to the
          Contract shall remain unchanged.

     3.   Addendum # 3 is the essential of the Contract, comes into force on
          May 10, 2001 and affects during the Contract period.


Rayonier Inc.                                      JSC "Forest-Starma


 /s/ Robert J. Cartano                              /s/ David Daggett
-----------------------------                      -----------------------------
Robert J. Cartano                                  David Daggett
Director of Operations                             General Director
International Forest Products

                                                    /s/ V. A. Limarenko
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                   V. A. Limarenko
                                                   First Deputy General Director
----

**Exhibit 23.1**
 

 

 

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in RegistrationStatements (No.333-148253, No.333-151678 and No. 333-151985) on Form S-3 and theRegistration Statements (No. 333-137747, No. 333-153649 and No. 333-153650) onForm S-8 of China BAK Battery, Inc. (the "Company") of our reports datedDecember 14, 2009, relating to the Company's consolidated financial statementsand the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reportingappearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year endedSeptember 30, 2009.

/s/ PKF                                               PKFCertified Public AccountantsHong Kong, ChinaDecember 14, 2009
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

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 28, 2003,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Petsec Energy Ltd and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2002 and the related consolidated
statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss) and cash flows for each of
the years in the three year period ended December 31, 2002 which report appears
in the December 31, 2002 annual report on Form 20-F of Petsec Energy Ltd.

KPMG

Sydney, Australia
June 23, 2003
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH 

					NO. 2-04-028-CV

DOUGLAS WEST	APPELLANT

	V.

ROBERT CROCKER	APPELLEE

	----------

	FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

	----------

		MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

	On January 29, 2004 and February 25, 2004, we notified appellant, in accordance with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this appeal unless the $125 filing fee was paid.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c).  Appellant has not paid the $125 filing fee.  See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

	Because appellant has failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court's order of July 21, 1998,2 we dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

	Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d).

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:	GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.

DELIVERED:	APRIL 1, 2004
# C_2022323EN.01013501.xml

| 26.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 323/135 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 323/135

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending and correcting Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 as regards specific measures to alleviate the consequences of the military aggression of Russia against Ukraine on fishing activities and to mitigate the effects of the market disruption caused by that military aggression on the supply chain of fishery and aquaculture products

(COM(2022) 179 — 2022/0118 COD)

(2022/C 323/25)

| Referral | Council, 25.4.2022
  European Parliament, 2.5.2022 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Articles 43(2), 175 and article 304 of the TFEU |
| Section responsible | Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment |
| Adopted at plenary | 18.5.2022 |
| Plenary session No | 569 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 188/2/2 |

Referral

Council, 25.4.2022

European Parliament, 2.5.2022

Legal basis

Articles 43(2), 175 and article 304 of the TFEU

Section responsible

Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment

Adopted at plenary

18.5.2022

Plenary session No

569

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

188/2/2

In view of the short deadlines and the necessary character of the EC initiative, the Committee decided, at its 569th plenary session of 18 and 19 May 2022 (meeting of 18 May), by 188 votes in favour, 2 votes against and 2 abstentions, not to draw up a substantial opinion but to formally endorse the proposal.

Brussels, 18 May 2022.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG

---
Exhibit 10(o)







EXHIBIT 10(o)




EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION




THIS EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION (this “Agreement Extension”) is entered into effective the
30 day of March, 2010, by and between The Franklin Savings and Loan Company, a savings and loan
association organized under the laws of the State of Ohio (the “Employer”), and Lawrence J.
Spitzmueller (the “Employee”).



WITNESSETH:




WHEREAS, the Employee is currently employed as the Vice President of the Employer; and



WHEREAS, the Employer and the Employee are parties to an employment agreement dated December
20, 2004 and amended December 30, 2008 (the “Employment Agreement”); and



WHEREAS, the current expiration date of the Employment Agreement is March 31, 2012; and



WHEREAS, Section 1 of the Employment Agreement provides that the Employer’s Board of Directors
may extend the term of the Employment Agreement; and



WHEREAS, as a result of the skill, knowledge, performance and experience of the Employee, the
Board of Directors of the Employer has determined that the Employment Agreement should be extended;
and



WHEREAS, the Employee desires to continue to serve as the Vice President of the Employer and
consents to the extension of the Employment Agreement;



NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants herein contained, the
Employer and the Employee hereby agree as follows:



1. Extension of Term of Employment Agreement. The term of the Employment Agreement is
hereby extended and the Employment Agreement shall terminate on March 31, 2013 (the “Extended
Term”).



2. Effect of Prior Agreements. All of the terms and conditions of the Employment
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect during the Extended Term.



[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK; SIGNATURES FOLLOW]



 


 









 








IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Employer has caused this Agreement Extension to be executed by its
duly authorized officer, and the Employee has consented to and signed this Agreement Extension,
each as of the date first above written.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	EMPLOYER:	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Attest:	 	THE FRANKLIN SAVINGS AND LOAN COMPANY	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Margaret Havlin
 


	 	By:

	 	/s/ Gretchen J. Schmidt
 

Name:  Gretchen J. Schmidt
	 	 
	 

	 	 
	 	Title:    President	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Attest:	 	EMPLOYEE:	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Margaret Havlin	 	/s/ Lawrence J. Spitzmueller
Exhibit
10.13

      


      Money4Gold
Holdings, Inc.

      595
S. Federal Highway, Suite 600

      Boca
Raton, Florida 33432

      


      December
1, 2009

       

      Mr. Todd
Oretsky

      595 S.
Federal Highway

      Suite
600

      Boca
Raton, Florida 33432

      


      Re:       
Salary Amendment

      


      Dear Mr.
Oretsky:

      


      This letter agreement amends your
current employment agreement (the “Employment Agreement”) with Money4Gold
Holdings, Inc. by increasing your annual salary to $275,000, effective December
1, 2009, and to $300,000, effective June 1, 2010.

      


      All other
terms and conditions of your Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect.  Please sign below acknowledging your acceptance to the
amended salary terms above.

      


      
        
          
            	
                    Sincerely
      yours,

                  
	 
	
                    /s/
      Douglas Feirstein

                  
	
                    Douglas
      Feirstein

                  
	
                    Chief
      Executive Officer

                  


          

        

      

      


      I agree
to the above terms:

      


      
        
          
            	
                    /s/
      Todd Oretsky

                  
	
                    Todd
      Oretsky
#### BOWEN, Plaintiff, v. SWEENEY, Defendant.

(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.

June 15, 1894.)

Action by Michael Bowen against Michael Sweeney. F. P. Chandler, for plaintiff. W. H. Arnoux, for defendant.

No opinion. Motion dismissed, with $10 costs and disbursements. See 17 N. Y. Supp. 752 ; 20 N. Y. Supp. 733, 734.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published

and is not precedent except in the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 98-40959

Summary Calendar

JAMES EARL MANKINS, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

DAN MORALES, Attorney General; SHANE PHELPS; MACK COBBS; LUCIEN C. HAAG; 

I.C. STONE; GEORGE KEINY; STUART DOWELL; GLENN ELLIOT,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

(6:97-CV-920)

April 29, 1999

Before WISDOM, DUHÉ, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

James Earl Mankins, a federal inmate, filed suit against the named defendants under 42

U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his civil rights. Mankins contends that prior to being

convicted of the narcotics violations for which he is currently imprisoned, the defendants violated

his civil rights by wrongfully prosecuting him for a murder that he did not commit. A magistrate

judge reviewed the complaint and recommended that it be dismissed as frivolous. The district

court adopted this recommendation, and the suit was dismissed. Mankins now appeals.

After the magistrate judge made his initial recommendation to the district court, Mankins

had ten days in which to file objections to that report and recommendation. Mankins failed to do
 

2

 Douglass v. United Serv. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428 (5th Cir. 1996)(en banc).

 

3

 Highlands Ins. Co. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., 27 F.3d 1027, 1032 (5th Cir. 1994).

 

4

 R.44 (cite omitted).

so. Because of this failure on Mankins’s part, we review the judgment of the district court for

plain error.2 To prevail Mankins must now show: that an error occurred; that the error was clear

or obvious; that the error will affect Mankins’s substantial rights; and that failure to correct the

error would seriously affect the fairness of the judicial proceedings.3

The report of the magistrate judge correctly states that a prisoner’s attack on the fact or

length of his confinement is properly raised in a petition for habeas corpus, not in a § 1983 claim.4

In this case, however, Mankins attacks neither the fact nor the length of his confinement. 

Mankins’s claim is that his civil rights were violated during the course of a previous investigation

which did not result in a conviction. All the actions Mankins alleges were taken in violation of his

civil rights occurred prior to his present incarceration. Further, Mankins does not seek relief in

the form of release from incarceration or a shorter term of incarceration. Applying the plain error

standard to the facts before us, we hold that the district court committed plain error in adopting

the recommendation of the magistrate judge.

VACATED AND REMANDED.
#### Lonnie POYDRAS, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Michael J. JEFFERSON, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 10-31003

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 29, 2011.

Lonnie Poydras, Port Allen, LA, pro se.

Before KING, BENAVIDES, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Lonnie Poydras, Louisiana prisoner #42058, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the City of Baton Rouge, Baton Rouge City Police Officers Christopher Wheat and Donald Johnson, and Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) Michael J. Jefferson, alleging that he was subjected to a false arrest and malicious prosecution. The district court determined that AUSA Jefferson was entitled to absolute immunity and dismissed the malicious prosecution claim against him as frivolous. The district court docket sheet reflects that claims remain pending against the other defendants.

Because the district court dismissed some but not all claims and defendants, we must sua sponte examine whether we have jurisdiction to consider the appeal. *See*
      *281
      *Martin v. Halliburton,*618 F.3d 476, 481 (5th Cir.2010). We have jurisdiction over appeals from (1) final orders pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291; (2) orders that are deemed final due to a jurisprudential exception, such as the collateral order doctrine; (3) interlocutory orders specified in 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a); and (4) interlocutory orders that are properly certified for appeal by the district court pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) or § 1292(b). *Dardar v. Lafourche Realty Co.,*849 F.2d 955, 957 (5th Cir.1988); *Save the Bay, Inc. v. U.S. Army,*639 F.2d 1100, 1102 & n. 3 (5th Cir.1981). Because the order from which Poydras appeals does not fall within any of these categories, we lack jurisdiction to consider the appeal, and the appeal is DISMISSED. Poydras’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is DENIED.

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.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
R ENALDO LAMAR WISE , A ppellant ,

v. Case No. 5D 22

- 1204 LT Case No. 2009

- CF

- 2802
STAT E OF FLORIDA ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/
Decision filed July 19, 2022 3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County , Lisa D. Herndon, Judge.
Renaldo L amar Wise, L ake B utler, pro se. Ashley M oody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, an d P amela J. Koller, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
A FFIRMED.

C OHEN , EDWARDS and TRAVER , JJ., concur.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5687 

To extend changes to requirements for admission of nonimmigrant nurses 

in health professional shortage areas made by the Nursing Relief for 

Disadvantaged Areas Act of 1999. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 1, 2010 

Mr. CUELLAR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To extend changes to requirements for admission of nonimmigrant nurses in health professional shortage areas 

made by the Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged Areas 

Act of 1999. 

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 ‘‘Underserved Area 

5 Nursing Relief Restoration Act of 2010’’. 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5687 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION FOR CHANGES TO REQUIREMENTS FOR 

2 ADMISSION OF NONIMMIGRANT NURSES IN 

3 HEALTH PROFESSIONAL SHORTAGE AREAS. 

4 Section 2(e)(2) of the Nursing Relief for Disadvan5 taged Areas Act of 1999 (8 U.S.C. 1182 note) is amended 

6 to read as follows: 

7 ‘‘(e) APPLICATION OF NONIMMIGRANT CHANGES.— 

8 The amendments made by this section shall apply to clas9 sification petitions filed for nonimmigrant status only— 

10 ‘‘(1) during the period— 

11 ‘‘(A) beginning on the date that interim or 

12 final regulations are first promulgated under 

13 subsection (d); and 

14 ‘‘(B) ending on the date that is 3 years 

15 after the date of the enactment of the Nursing 

16 Relief for Disadvantaged Areas Reauthorization 

17 Act of 2005; and 

18 ‘‘(2) beginning on the date of enactment of the 

19 Underserved Area Nursing Relief Restoration Act of 

20 2010.’’. 

21 SEC. 3. EXEMPTION FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCE22 DURE ACT. 

23 The requirements of chapter 5 of title 5, United 

24 States Code (commonly referred to as the ‘‘Administrative 

25 Procedure Act’’) or any other law relating to rulemaking, 

26 information collection or publication in the Federal RegVerDate Mar 15 2010 00:45 Jul 03, 2010 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H5687.IH H5687

rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5687 IH

1 ister, shall not apply to any action to implement the 

2 amendments made by section 2 to the extent the Secretary 

3 Homeland of Security, the Secretary of Labor, or the Sec4 retary of Health and Human Services determines that 

5 compliance with any such requirement would impede the 

6 expeditious implementation of such amendments. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS