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

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          25,759
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             206
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                57,268
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    220,379
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         235,779
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           235,564
<LOANS>                                        399,855
<ALLOWANCE>                                      5,006
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 965,785
<DEPOSITS>                                     855,273
<SHORT-TERM>                                    31,144
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              4,123
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      7,000
<COMMON>                                         3,003
<OTHER-SE>                                      65,242
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 965,785
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 25,033
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               22,833
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   785
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                48,651
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              22,144
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              22,175
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           26,476
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      675
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 19,639
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,781
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      12,781
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,284
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.84
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.84
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.59
<LOANS-NON>                                        515
<LOANS-PAST>                                       405
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 4,436
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      871
<RECOVERIES>                                       278
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                5,006
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             5,006
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




The
      undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of DCI USA, Inc. (the "Company") does
      hereby certify under the standards set forth and solely for the purposes of
      18
      U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002, that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company
      for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements
      of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information
      contained in that Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated:
                April 17, 2007
            
            /s/ Michael GibbsMichael
              GibbsCFO





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 31.2

SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 302(a) CERTIFICATION

Principal Executive Officer

I, Richard Wachter, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this amended annual report on Form 10-KSB of FIRSTBINGO.COM INC.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Dated this 6th day of June, 2005.



| | /s/ Thomas Sheppard        
| | ---------------------------
| | Thomas Sheppard            
| | Principal Executive Officer
THIS VERSION INCLUDES THE ERRATA DATED 3MAY00- e

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

NO. 99-622

RODNEY C. GANTKA, APPELLANT,

 V.

TOGO D. WEST, JR.,

SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, APPELLEE.

Before NEBEKER, Chief Judge, and KRAMER, FARLEY,

HOLDAWAY, IVERS, STEINBERG, and GREENE, Judges.

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the appellant's motion to exceed the page limit for his initial brief, and

of the Secretary's opposition thereto, and it appearing that the appellant, in a lodged brief, has failed,

without explanation, to comply with Rule 32(b) (the limit of 11 characters per inch), it is 

ORDERED that the motion to file is denied and the Clerk is directed to return the lodged

brief. It is further

ORDERED that the appellant's brief shall be filed within 15 days after the date of this order.

Failure to file the brief in a timely fashion may subject the appeal to dismissal. See U.S. VET.APP.

R. 31(b).

DATED: April 20, 2000 PER CURIAM.
<Page>

Exhibit 2.9

                              SAHYOUN HOLDINGS LLC
                                4 WHITE HOUSE WAY
                                MONROE, NJ 08831


                                                            April 15, 2002

Mr. Joseph Raymond, CEO
Stratus Services Group, Inc.
500 Craig Road
Manalapan, NJ

Subject:  Letter Agreement

Dear Joe:

     This letter shall serve to document our agreement regarding a change in the
Allocation Agreement between Stratus Services Group, Inc., Sahyoun Holdings,
and myself, Charles Sahyoun. Due to Stratus's current need for capital,
Sahyoun Holdings will provide Stratus Services Group, Inc. with $200,000 in
the form of a short term, 90 day, demand note. Stratus shall agree to
reimburse Sahyoun Holdings, LLC by August 1, 2002 in the amount of $250,000.

     Such $250,000 shall be payable from distributions currently scheduled to be
paid to Stratus Services Group, Inc., from proceeds received by SEP, LLC.
Distributions made by SEP, LLC are in accordance with proceeds received from SEA
Consulting Services Corp, on or about July 30, 2002.

     If for any reason, such proceeds due SEP, LLC are not received, and are
there for not distributable, the repayment amount of $250,000 shall be paid by
you, Joseph Raymond, from your person assets, on or about September 1, 2002.

     If you agree to the above terms, please sign below to signify your
acknowledgement and understanding of this agreement.

                                           Sincerely,


                                           /s/ Charles Sahyoun
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Charles Sahyoun
                                           President, Sahyoun Holdings, LLC


/s/ Joseph J. Raymond
--------------------------------------

Mr. Joseph Raymond

CEO, Stratus Services Group, Inc.

/s/ Michael A. Maltzman                    /s/ Joseph J. Raymond
--------------------------------------     -------------------------------------

Mr. Michael Maltzman                       Mr. Joseph Raymond
CFO, Stratus Services Group, Inc.      Individual
476 F.2d 538

#### UNITED STATES of America v. Clinton L. PHILLIPS, Appellant.

No. 72-1859.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued April 23, 1973.

Decided May 16, 1973.

Dorothy R. Burakreis *, with whom Heathcote W. Wales, Sherman L. Cohn and Linda Blumenfeld * (all appointed by this court), were on the brief, for appellant.

Richard S. Vermeire, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Harold H. Titus, Jr., U. S. Atty., and John A. Terry and Kenneth Michael Robinson, Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the brief, for appellee.

Before WRIGHT and TAMM, Circuit Judges, and DAVIES,** Senior District Judge.

*

 Student counsel appointed pursuant to Rule 20 of the Geñeral Rules of this court.

**

 Of the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota, sitting by designation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 294 (d) (1970).

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, charged in a two-count indictment with second degree murder, a violation of 22 D.C.Code § 2403 (1967), and with carrying a dangerous weapon without a license, a violation of 22 D.C. Code § 3204 (1967), appeals from his conviction of the latter crime.

We reach only appellant’s contention that the prosecutor’s improper closing and rebuttal arguments were so highly prejudicial as to require reversal.

On no fewer than three occasions, once during closing and twice during rebuttal, the prosecutor sought to draw an analogy between the crime charged against appellant and those involving Sirhan Sirhan, James Earl Ray, [Richard] Speck and Jack Ruby.

> “While such an argument is always to be condemned as ‘an appeal wholly irrelevant to any facts or issues in the case,’ Viereck v. United States, 318 U. S. 236, 247, 63 S.Ct. 561, 566, 87 L. Ed. 734 (1943), and as a dereliction of the prosecutor’s high duty to prosecute fairly, see Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 88, 55 S.Ct. 629, 79 L.Ed. 1314 (1935), in the context of current events, raising the spectre of [heinous crimes] . . . was an especially flagrant and reprehensible appeal to *94passion and prejudice. Although the prosecutor ‘may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.’ Berger v. United States, *supra,*295 U.S. at 88, 55 S.Ct. at 633; Viereck v. United States, *supra,*318 U.S. at 248, 63 S.Ct. at 567.” Brown v. United States, 125 U.S.App.D.C. 220, 224, 370 F.2d 242, 246 (1966).

Reversed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998             MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997             SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           2,656                   2,656
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   29,356                  29,356
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,174                   1,174
<INVENTORY>                                     26,989                  26,989
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                60,737                  60,737
<PP&E>                                          18,137                  18,137
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,777                   8,777
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  98,055                  98,055
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           34,871                  34,871
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            2,650                   2,650
<PREFERRED>                                      2,256                   2,256
<COMMON>                                            11                      11
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    98,055                  98,055
<SALES>                                         86,006                  48,695
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                86,006                  48,695
<CGS>                                           59,007                  33,159
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   59,007                  33,159
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,212                   1,893
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,634                   1,913
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,079                     761
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,555                   1,152
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,555                   1,152
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20                    0.14
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1








Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(18 U.S.C. 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report of NovaDel Pharma Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Steven B. Ratoff, President, Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.§ 1350), 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 presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Date:  May 17, 2010
By:
/s/ STEVEN B. RATOFFSteven B. RatoffPresident, Chief Executive Officerand Interim Chief Financial Officer








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





This certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act.
ex10-57.htm











                Exhibit 10.57


 


  Sales Contract            December 9, 2009












The Parties--


Buyer: Sanming Huajian Bioengineering Co., Ltd.


Address: Jikou Neighborhood, Industrial Development Zone, Sanyuan Distrct, Sanming


Tel: 0598-8523617, 0598-8321366


Contact: Lin Yingjian


Bank: Agricultural Bank of China, Sanyuan Branch


Account No.: 13830101040006233


And Supplier: Fuzhou Xianglong Food Addictives Co., Ltd.


Address: 251, Wuyi Road (S), Fuzhou


Tel: 0591-83267248


Contact:


Bank: Industrial Bank, Taijiang Branch


Account No.:117210102100012980


hereby enter into this Sales Contract after consultation and agree as follows:








	
I.  

	
Items, quantity (in tons), prices and amounts








	
Items

	
Specifications

	
Qty (ton)

	
Unit price

	
Total


	
Angel Yeast

	
N/A

	
2.6

	
29,500

	
76,700


	
Brown sugar

	
N/A

	
1.4

	
3,800

	
5,320


	
Starch

	
N/A

	
0.5

	
2,500

	
1,250


	
total

	
RMB 83,270 Yuan







 




 



	II. 	
Product specifications and quality:                                                                                                


The products are of Class-A quality by national standard.


	III.	
Point of delivery:                                                                                                                               


The products shall be delivered at the Buyer’s plant.


	IV. 	
Delivery time:                                                                                                                                   


The products shall be delivered between December 11, 2009 and December 14, 2009.


	V. 	
Settlement of payment:                                                                                                                    


The Buyer shall make payment to the Supplier within 30 days following receipt of products.


	VI.	
Transportation charges:                                                                                                                 


The supplier shall be responsible for the transportation charges, which are included in the total price.


	VII.  	Further provisions: N/A
	VIII.  	Miscellaneous
	1. 	This contract shall be executed in two equally binding counterparts, with either Party holding one. The Contract shall become effective upon execution. Copies hereof shall      have equal binding force.
	 2. 	The Parties shall settle through amicable negotiations any dispute arising from the performance hereof, or submit it to the arbitration authority for arbitration.





 


 


Buyer:                                                          Supplier:


Authorized representative:                      Authorized representative:


(seal)                                                            (seal)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Darryl Walker, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Farlo, J.), rendered February 24, 1986, convicting him of burglary in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, petit larceny, and menacing, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review the propriety of two of the prosecutor’s remarks made during his summation and the propriety of the Judge’s charge *(see, People v Dordal,*55 NY2d 954, *rearg dismissed*61 NY2d 759), and we decline to reach them in the interest of justice. As to the remark which was preserved for review, the prosecutor’s comment was well within the bounds of advocacy as well as in response to issues raised in the defense summation *(see, People*
      *871
      *v Ashwal,*39 NY2d 105). Lawrence, J. P., Weinstein, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

E. S., by and through her parents, R.S. and 

J.S., on her own behalf, and on behalf of all 

similarly situated individuals; JODI 

STERNOFF, on her own behalf, and on 

behalf of all similarly situated individuals, 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

 v. 

REGENCE BLUESHIELD; CAMBIA 

HEALTH SOLUTIONS, INC, FKA The 

Regence Group, 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-35892 

D.C. No. 2:17-cv-01609-RAJ 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Richard A. Jones, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted November 8, 2019

Seattle, Washington

Before: GOULD and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges, and PRESNELL,** District 

Judge.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The Honorable Gregory A. Presnell, United States District Judge for 

the Middle District of Florida, sitting by designation.

FILED

JUL 14 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

Plaintiffs appeal from the district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to 

state a claim their complaint alleging health care discrimination under the 

Affordable Care Act, 42 U.S.C. § 18116. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 1291. Pursuant to our concurrently filed opinion in Schmitt v. Kaiser 

Foundation Health Plan of Washington, No. 18-35846, we affirm the dismissal of 

the complaint, reverse the district court’s decision not to allow amendment, and 

remand with instructions to grant plaintiffs leave to amend.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.