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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           73873
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 73873
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   80256
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             1549
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           104
<OTHER-SE>                                       78603
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     80256
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 01093
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    91
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   1002
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               1002
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1002
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.10
        

</TABLE>
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 31, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
127982 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 127982 COA: 255024 Wayne CC: 94-013243 DEMONE J. FOX, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e December 16, 2004 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

p1024 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 31, 2005

Clerk
Matthew J. DEBEIKES, petitioner, v. HAWAIIAN AIRLINES, Inc., et al.

No. 17-9105.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 13, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
(LOGO) Deloitte & Touche

Deloitte & Touche LLP
700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4500
Seattle, Washington 98104-5044
Telephone: (206) 292-1800
Facsimile: (206) 343-7809


INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT ON
COMPLIANCE WITH UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION
PROGRAM FOR MORTGAGE BANKERS


Audit Committee of the Board of Directors
Washington Mutual, Inc.
Seattle, Washington

We have examined  management's  assertion about Washington  Mutual,  lnc.'s (the
Company)  compliance  with the minimum  servicing  standards  identified  in the
Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for
Mortgage Bankers (USAP) as of and for the year ended December 31, 1999, included
in the  accompanying  management  assertion.  Management is responsible  for the
Company's compliance with those minimum servicing standards.  Our responsibility
is  to  express  an  opinion  on  management's  assertion  about  the  Company's
compliance based on our examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on a test basis,  evidence about the Company's  compliance  with the
minimum  servicing   standards  and  performing  such  other  procedures  as  we
considered  necessary  in the  circumstances.  We believe  that our  examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a
legal  determination  on the  Company's  compliance  with the minimum  servicing
standards.

In our opinion,  management's  assertion that Washington  Mutual,  Inc. complied
with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the year ended
December 31, 1999, is fairly stated, in all material respects.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

February 25,2000

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (Logo)
Case 9:23-cv-00092-MJT Document 1-2 Filed 05/17/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 11
Case 9:23-cv-00092-MJT Document 1-2 Filed 05/17/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 12
Case 9:23-cv-00092-MJT Document 1-2 Filed 05/17/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 13
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Annual Report of TALX Corporation (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, L. Keith Graves, Vice
President, Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary of the Company,
certify, to the best of my knowledge, 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 results of operations
            of the Company.

                                 By :  /s/ L. Keith Graves
                                       --------------------------------------
                                 L. Keith Graves
                                 Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
                                 and Assistant Secretary
                                 TALX Corporation
                                 May 31, 2006
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 169 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 169

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To amend the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, to expand the pilot 
 investigation for the collection of information regarding prices paid 
  for the procurement of cattle and sheep for slaughter and of muscle 
    cuts of beef and lamb to include swine and muscle cuts of swine.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 169

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To amend the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, to expand the pilot 
 investigation for the collection of information regarding prices paid 
  for the procurement of cattle and sheep for slaughter and of muscle 
    cuts of beef and lamb to include swine and muscle cuts of swine.

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

SECTION 1. EXPANSION OF MANDATORY DOMESTIC REPORTING PILOT 
              INVESTIGATION UNDER THE PACKERS AND STOCKYARDS ACT, 1921.

    (a) Inclusion of Swine; Reference to Forward Contracting.--Section 
416 of the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921 (7 U.S.C. 229a), as added 
by section 1127 of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (as 
contained in section 101(a) of division A of Public Law 105-277), is 
amended in both paragraphs (1) and (2)--
            (1) by striking ``beef, or'' and inserting ``beef,''; and
            (2) by inserting after ``lamb,'' the following: ``or 
        domestic or imported swine for immediate slaughter and fresh 
        muscle cuts of swine,''.
    (b) Technical Corrections.--Such section is further amended by 
redesignating paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) as subsections (a), (b), and 
(c), respectively.
    (c) Duration of Swine Pilot Investigation.--Such section is further 
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(d) Possible Extension of Pilot Investigation.--If the pilot 
investigation required by this section is implemented before the date 
on which the pilot investigation is expanded to include swine, the 
Secretary of Agriculture shall continue the pilot investigation beyond 
the 12-month period referred to in subsection (a) so that price 
information regarding the procurement of domestic or imported swine for 
immediate slaughter and fresh muscle cuts of swine is collected under 
the pilot investigation for 12 months.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 9, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
GERAWAN FARMING, INC., petitioner, v. AGRICULTURAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD.

No. 17-1375.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Motion of The NFIB Small Business Legal Center, et al. for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae* granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1951

To suspend temporarily the duty on HIV/AIDS drugs.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 26, 1999

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

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on HIV/AIDS drugs.

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

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

7 new subheading:
2

•HR 1951 IH

‘‘ 9902.32.98 [4R-

[3(2S*,3S*),

4R*]]-3-[2-Hydroxy-3-[(3-hydroxy-2-methyl

benzoyl)amino]-

1-oxo-4-phenylbutyl]-5,5-dimethyl-N-[(2-

methylphenyl)methyl]-4-

thiazolidinecarboxamide (CAS No.

186538–00–1)

(provided for in

subheading

2930.90.90) ....... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/2002 ’’.

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 this section applies with respect to goods entered, or with3 drawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the

4 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 6610

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. NATHANIEL GRAHAM, a/k/a Nasty , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte

. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. ( 3:12

- cr - 00188

- FDW

- DSC

- 13; 3:17

- cv - 00260

- FDW )

Submitted : August 16, 2018 Decided: August 21, 2018

Before WYNN and DIAZ , Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Nathaniel Graham, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Nathaniel Graham s eeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appea lability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurist s would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Graham has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials befo re this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
Exhibit 13.2


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 Amendment No.1 on Form 20-F/A to the annual report of Silicom Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I the undersigned, being the Chief Financial 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 my knowledge:
 1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of sections 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.
  Signature: /S/ Eran Gilad
 Eran Gilad, Chief Financial Officer
 
 Date: October 19, 2010
Adrian M. REQUENA, petitioner, v. Ray ROBERTS, et al.

No. 18-6264.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
Henry Earl MILLER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9016.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Martin SALINAS, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 18-5851.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas denied.
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER ANDCHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Annual Report of Boss Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended December 29, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, G. Louis Graziadio
III, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Steven G. Pont,
Vice President of Finance and Principal Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, 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, as amended; and                   
| | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |   
| | 2. |  | The information contained in the
      Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: March 28,
2008

|/s/ G. LOUIS GRAZIADIO III                                      
|----------------------------------------------------------------
|G. LOUISGRAZIADIOIII,*Chairman of the Board and
      President*
|*Principal Executive
      Officer*                             
|                                                                
|/s/ STEVEN G. PONT                                              
|STEVENG. PONT,Vice President of Finance                         
|*Principal Financial
      Officer*                             

E5

---
EX-10.6.2





 Exhibit 10.6.2 
 



 
 John Richard 
 [XXXXXXXXXXXX]

 1 March 2019 
 Dear John 

Letter of Amendment to Consultancy Agreement between Mereo BioPharma Group plc (“Mereo”) and John Richard & Associates LLC
(“JRA”) dated 23 January 2019 (“Agreement”) 
 We write to confirm the following amendment as permitted by Clause 10 of the
Agreement. 
 It is agreed between Mereo and JRA that Appendix 2 of the Agreement is amended as follows: 

The following clause is deleted: 
 “Retainer: The Company
will pay Consultant a retainer of $25,550 per month” 
 and is replaced by: 

“Retainer: The Company will pay Consultant a retainer of $26,316 per month” 

The change shall be effective from 1 January 2019 
 Please
confirm receipt and acceptance of this letter by signing, dating and returning the enclosed copy. 
 Yours sincerely 

/s/ Denise Scots-Knight 
 Denise Scots-Knight 

Chief Executive Officer 
 Mereo BioPharma Group plc 

Mereo BioPharma Group plc 
 4th Floor, 1 Cavendish Place 
 London, W1G 0QF 

T: +44 (0) 3330237300 
 www.mereobiopharma.com

  
  

Mereo Biopharma Group plc is company registered in England and Wales under number 9481161 whose registered office is at 4th Floor, 1 Cavendish Place, W1G 0QF. 












 



 
 John Richards & Associates LLC acknowledge receipt of this letter: 

Signed: /s/ John Richard 
 Name: John Richard 

Date: 1 March 2019 
  

 
 Mereo BioPharma Group plc 

4th Floor, 1 Cavendish Place 

London, W1G 0QF 
 T: +44 (0) 3330237300

 www.mereobiopharma.com 
  

 
 Mereo Biopharma Group plc is company registered in
England and Wales under number 9481161 whose registered office is at 4th Floor, 1 Cavendish Place, W1G 0QF.
Charles HOWARD, III, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18M38.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
Jose Gilberto PORTILLO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6463.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 3, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals denied.
```

```

----

Updated December 21, 2012
Francisco MONTEIRO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8041.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
Michael A. KENNEDY, petitioner, v. MICHIGAN STATE TREASURER.

No. 18-5633.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 9, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Michigan denied.
Charles Lee BURTON, petitioner, v. ALABAMA.

No. 18-5937.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 15, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama denied.
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2019

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that the unearned

income of children attributable to personal injury awards shall not be

taxed at the marginal rate of the parents.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 7, 1999

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut (for herself, Mr. ENGLISH, Mrs. THURMAN, Mr.

FOLEY, Mr. COOKSEY, Mr. SHOWS, Mr. SANDLIN, Mrs. CLAYTON, Mr.

WYNN, and Mr. PAUL) introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide

that the unearned income of children attributable to personal injury awards shall not be taxed at the marginal

rate of the parents.

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

3 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF UNEARNED INCOME OF CHIL4 DREN ATTRIBUTABLE TO PERSONAL INJURY

5 AWARDS.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (4) of section 1(g) of

7 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to taxation
2

•HR 2019 IH

1 of unearned income of minor children at parent’s rate) is

2 amended by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subpara3 graph (C) and by inserting after subparagraph (A) the

4 following new subparagraph:

5 ‘‘(B) EXCEPTION FOR UNEARNED INCOME

6 ATTRIBUTABLE TO PERSONAL INJURY

7 AWARDS.—

8 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—There shall not be

9 taken into account under subparagraph

10 (A)(i) any qualified injury award income.

11 ‘‘(ii) QUALIFIED INJURY AWARD IN12 COME.—For purposes of clause (i), the

13 term ‘qualified injury award income’ means

14 income attributable to an amount excluded

15 from the gross income of the child by rea16 son of section 104(a)(2) if—

17 ‘‘(I) the excluded amount is re18 ceived by the child in a lump sum,

19 and

20 ‘‘(II) the income accrues on the

21 excluded amount while in a custodial

22 account (other than a trust) the

23 amounts in which are prohibited

24 under State law from being used to
3

•HR 2019 IH

1 satisfy any person’s obligation to sup2 port or maintain the child.’’

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

4 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

5 December 31, 1999.

Æ
Perry Joe PATTERSON, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 17-8751.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Troy WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 18-8997.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District denied.
David BRILEY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8523.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to *66the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit for further consideration in light of *Sessions v. Dimaya,* 584 U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 1204, 200 L.Ed.2d 549 (2018).