alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.1




In connection with the CNB Florida  Bancshares,  Inc. (the "Company")  Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  September 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof,  (the "Report"),  I, K.C.
Trowell,  Chairman of the Board,  President and Chief  Executive  Officer of the
Company,  certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



     1.   The Report 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  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of the Company.



                                            /s/  K.C. Trowell
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            K.C. Trowell
                                            Chairman of the Board, President and
                                            Chief Executive Officer
David L. DE CSEPEL, et al., petitioners, v. REPUBLIC OF HUNGARY, et al.

No. 17-1165.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 25, 2018.

The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.
Cary Michael LAMBRIX, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 17-6222 (17A375).

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 5, 2017.

Application for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice THOMAS and by him referred to the Court denied. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 95-20274

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOHN ADDISON BALLIS,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(H-92-CR-85-1)

July 17, 1996

Before JOHNSON, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

John Anderson Ballis argues the district court abused its

discretion by finding that his failure to file a timely notice of

appeal was not due to excusable neglect. Ballis was attempting to

appeal the district court’s order of April 3, 1995, dismissing his

motion for a reduction of sentence under former FED R. CRIM. P. 35.

Despite numerous opportunities to do so, Ballis has failed to offer

any reason for his failure to timely file his notice of appeal

when--by his own admission--he did receive the district court’s
2

order on the tenth and final day to make a timely response. Under

such circumstances we cannot say that the district court abused its

discretion in failing to find excusable neglect on the part of

Ballis. See United States v. Clark, 51 F.3d 42, 43 (5th Cir.

1995).

AFFIRMED.
Aaron RAGLIN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-8895.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 16, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Isaac Kelvin ALLEN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5530.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
```
  
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 12/22/09          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       46,291
COMMITMENTS
   8,837    3,508    8,591   19,750   21,781   37,177   33,881    9,113   12,410

CHANGES FROM 12/15/09 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:       -463)
     -76      743     -383     -214   -1,186     -673     -826      210      363

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    19.1      7.6     18.6     42.7     47.1     80.3     73.2     19.7     26.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       59)
       7       12       17       25       21       45       45
```

----

Updated December 28, 2009
# L_2006175EN.01010401.xml

| 29.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 175/104 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 175/104

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 53/2006

of 28 April 2006

amending Annex XXII (Company law) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex XXII to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 37/2006 of 10 March 2006 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex XXII to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 37/2006 of 10 March 2006 (1).

| (2) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 2106/2005 of 21 December 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No 1725/2003 adopting certain international accounting standards in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as regards International Accounting Standard (IAS) 39 (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2106/2005 of 21 December 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No 1725/2003 adopting certain international accounting standards in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as regards International Accounting Standard (IAS) 39 (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following indent shall be added in point 10ba (Commission Regulation (EC) No 1725/2003) of Annex XXII to the Agreement:

| ‘— | 32005 R 2106: Commission Regulation (EC) No 2106/2005 of 21 December 2005 (OJ L 337, 22.12.2005, p. 16).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32005 R 2106: Commission Regulation (EC) No 2106/2005 of 21 December 2005 (OJ L 337, 22.12.2005, p. 16).’

Article 2

The texts of Regulation (EC) No 2106/2005 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force 20 days after its adoption, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 28 April 2006.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

R. WRIGHT

---

(1)  
  OJ L 147, 1.6.2006, p. 56.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 337, 22.12.2005, p. 16.

2

(*1)  No Constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 11.01

                             Interpore International
                      Computations of Net Income Per Share
                      (in thousands, except per share data)
                                   (unaudited)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                 Three months ended  Nine months ended
                                                    September 30,       September 30,
                                                 ------------------  -----------------
                                                   1996      1995      1996      1995
                                                  ------    ------    ------    ------
<S>                                               <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>   
Net income                                        $  127    $  369    $  419    $1,255
                                                  ======    ======    ======    ======
Calculation of shares used in computing net
  income per share:
  Weighted average common shares outstanding       7,035     6,737     7,010     6,695
  Weighted average convertible preferred stock       122       459       192       474
  Common share equivalents outstanding               273       301       320       375
                                                  ------    ------    ------    ------
Shares used in computing net income per share      7,430     7,497     7,522     7,544
                                                  ======    ======    ======    ======
Net income per share                              $  .02    $  .05    $  .06    $  .17
                                                  ======    ======    ======    ======
</TABLE>


                                       16
Ceasar JONES, petitioner, v. NORTH CAROLINA.

No. 17-143.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 10, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of North Carolina, Forsyth County, denied.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

          - [Docket No. 22-12]

Notice is given that a complaint has been filed with the Federal Maritime Commission (Commission) by International Longshoremen's Association, hereinafter “Complainant”, against Gateway Terminals, LLC (Gateway), Charleston Stevedoring Company, LLC (CSC), Ports America Florida, Inc. (Ports America), Ceres Marine Terminals, Inc. (Ceres), and SSA Atlantic, LLC (SSA), hereinafter “Respondents.” Complainant alleges that Gateway is a marine terminal operator in the Port of Savannah, Georgia, and is a Georgia limited liability company, and is a joint venture composed of Ports America, SSA, and Ceres; CSC is a marine terminal operator in the Port of Charleston, South Carolina, and is a Delaware limited liability company, and is a joint venture of Ports America, SSA, and Ceres; Ports America is a Florida corporation; Ceres is a Maryland corporation; and SSA is a Delaware limited liability company.

                    Complainant alleges that Respondents violated 46 U.S.C. 41102(b), 41105(6), 41106 and 15 U.S.C. 13 with regard to anticompetitive and trade restrictive practices. The full text of the complaint can be found in the Commission's Electronic Reading Room at                     *https://www2.fmc.gov/​readingroom/​proceeding/​22-12/​.*

This proceeding has been assigned to Office of Administrative Law Judges. The initial decision of the presiding office in this proceeding shall be issued by April 12, 2023, and the final decision of the Commission shall be issued by October 26, 2023.

Served: April 12, 2022.

William Cody,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2022-08188 Filed 4-15-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6730-02-P
Marcellus S. WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. Cindy GRIFFITH, Warden.

No. 17-5642.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 12/08/09          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      536,091
COMMITMENTS
  35,809   32,623   97,955  381,824  385,365  515,588  515,942   20,503   20,149

CHANGES FROM 12/01/09 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     41,612)
  -1,966  -11,512   16,468   29,304   38,166   43,806   43,122   -2,194   -1,510

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
     6.7      6.1     18.3     71.2     71.9     96.2     96.2      3.8      3.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      117)
      22       23       41       60       68      105      112
```

----

Updated December 11, 2009
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Pamrapo Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
William J. Campbell, 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/    WILLIAM J.
CAMPBELLChief Executive Officer




August 12, 2003
# L_2008223EN.01005001.xml

| 21.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 223/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 223/50

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 52/2008

of 25 April 2008

amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex XIII to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 31/2008 of 14 March 2008 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex XIII to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 31/2008 of 14 March 2008 (1).

| (2) | Commission Decision 2006/920/EC of 11 August 2006 concerning the technical specification of interoperability relating to the subsystem ‘Traffic Operation and Management’ of the trans-European conventional rail system (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Decision 2006/920/EC of 11 August 2006 concerning the technical specification of interoperability relating to the subsystem ‘Traffic Operation and Management’ of the trans-European conventional rail system (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following point shall be inserted after point 37j (Commission Decision 2006/860/EC) of Annex XIII to the Agreement:

| ‘37k. | 32006 D 0920: Commission Decision 2006/920/EC of 11 August 2006 concerning the technical specification of interoperability relating to the subsystem “Traffic Operation and Management” of the trans-European conventional rail system (OJ L 359, 18.12.2006, p. 1).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘37k.

32006 D 0920: Commission Decision 2006/920/EC of 11 August 2006 concerning the technical specification of interoperability relating to the subsystem “Traffic Operation and Management” of the trans-European conventional rail system (OJ L 359, 18.12.2006, p. 1).’

Article 2

The text of Decision 2006/920/EC in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 26 April 2008, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 25 April 2008.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Alan SEATTER

---

(1)  
  OJ L 182, 10.7.2008, p. 26.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 359, 18.12.2006, p. 1.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
Carston Markel WOODSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5846.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 30, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

OCT 2 1998

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

 

SUNNI MUSLIM COMMUNITY OF

THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS; JAHAD ALI;

HASSAN LATIF; DONNIE RUSSELL;

DAVID MARQUEZ; BARON HALL;

individually and on behalf of those

similarly situated throughout the Colorado

Department of Corrections,

Plaintiffs,

and

ABRON ARRINGTON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. No. 98-1137

COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS; ARISTEDES

ZAVARAS, in his official capacity and

individually; RANDY HENDERSON, in

his official capacity and individually;

JACK LAUGHLIN, in his official

capacity and individually; FRANK

MILLER, in his official capacity and

individually; JOE PAOLINO, in his

official capacity and individually; and

other defendants Jane and John Does to be

named in the body of this action being

sued individually and in their official

capacity; ROBERT CANTWELL, in his

official capacity and individually; MARY

WEST, in her official capacity and

individually; RICK SOARES, in his

official capacity and individually,

(D.C. No. 95-M-1590)

(D. Colo.)
*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the

citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under

the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

** After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral

argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered

submitted without oral argument.

1

 Because only Plaintiff Arrington signed the notice of appeal, he is the only

proper appellant before this court. See 10th Cir. R. 3.1 (“Every notice of appeal must be

signed by the appellant or by counsel for the appellant.”); Smith v. Romer, No. 96-1211,

unpub. op., 1997 WL 57093 at *1 n.1 (10th Cir., Feb. 11, 1997).

2

Defendants-Appellees.

 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

 

Before BALDOCK, EBEL, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.**

 

This is an appeal from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in a prisoner

civil rights action, see Fed R. Civ. P. 56, wherein Plaintiffs unsuccessfully claimed that

certain policies and practices of the Colorado Department of Corrections restricted their

freedom of religion. On appeal, Plaintff-Appellant Abron Arrington, appearing pro se, 

raises the same grounds for relief that he did in the district court. Our jurisdiction arises

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.1 We have reviewed the briefs on appeal, the district court’s

Memorandum Opinion and Order, and the entire record before us. Based upon our

review of the record, we find no merit in any of Plaintiff’s claims and affirm substantially
3

for the reasons set forth in the district court’s order, a copy of which is attached hereto.

AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court,

Bobby R. Baldock

Circuit Judge
Attachment not available electronically.
Filed 10/6/20 P. v. The North River Insurance Co. CA2/7

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions 

not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion 

has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SEVEN

THE PEOPLE, 

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

THE NORTH RIVER 

INSURANCE CO. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

B295098

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. SJ4402)

 

 

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of 

Los Angeles County, Alison Estrada, Judge. Affirmed.

Jefferson T. Stamp for Defendants and Appellants.

Mary C. Wickham, County Counsel, Adrian G. Gragas, 

Assistant County Counsel, and Kelsey C. Nau, Deputy County 

Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
`

2

Bad Boys Bail Bonds, acting as the agent for The North 

River Insurance Company (collectively, North River), posted a 

bail bond to secure the release of a criminal defendant. When the 

defendant subsequently failed to appear at his arraignment, a 

superior court judge ordered the bond forfeited. A different 

superior court judge subsequently entered summary judgment 

against North River on the bond, and a third superior court judge 

later denied North River’s motion to set aside the summary 

judgment. North River appealed.

North River argues the superior court violated its due 

process rights and statutory rights under Penal Code 

section 1306 because the judge who entered the summary 

judgment was not the same judge who declared the forfeiture. 

We rejected the identical arguments by North River in People v. 

The North River Ins. Co. (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 559, 566-567.

The order is affirmed. The People are to recover their costs 

on appeal.

SEGAL, Acting P. J.

We concur:

FEUER, J. DILLON, J.*

* Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the 

Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California 

Constitution.
#### Walter J. Bryson Paving Company, a corporation, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. S. J. Pendleton, doing business as Pendleton Grain & Provision Company, *Defendant in Error.*

Special Division B.

Decision filed February 12, 1929.

*McCollum & Howell,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Fred H. Davis*and *Clyde W. Atkinson,*for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the circuit court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.