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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000911167
<NAME>                        Ariel Corporation
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         24,607,143
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  4,969,615
<ALLOWANCES>                                   860,867
<INVENTORY>                                    3,898,136
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               33,054,408
<PP&E>                                         4,193,740
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,920,231
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 35,009,333
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          7,785,134
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       9,755,150
<OTHER-SE>                                     25,280,439
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   35,009,333
<SALES>                                        13,568,059
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               13,568,059
<CGS>                                          8,247,966
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  8,247,966
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               15,442,738
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,217,001
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                18,431,585
<INCOME-TAX>                                   368,632
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            18,062,953
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   18,062,953
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  1.86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.84
        


</TABLE>
Velma BROOKS, Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS OFFICE, et al.

No. 18-1559

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Colorado denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

SHERMAN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 

TIFFANE CHANTIAL VOLZ (2)

§

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

CASE NUMBER 4:23-CR-00206 

ORDER ADOPTING UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND FINDING DEFENDANT GUILTY

The Court referred this matter to the United States Magistrate Judge for administration of 

a guilty plea under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. The Magistrate Judge conducted a 

hearing in the form and manner prescribed by Rule 11 and issued Findings of Fact and 

Recommendation on Guilty Plea. The Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court accept 

Defendant’s guilty plea and adjudge Defendant guilty on Count One of the Indictment. 

The parties have not objected to the Magistrate Judge’s findings. 

The Court hereby ADOPTS the Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea of 

the United States Magistrate Judge. The court also accepts Defendant’s plea but defers acceptance

of the plea agreement until after review of the presentence report.

In accordance with Defendant’s guilty plea, the Court finds Defendant Tiffane Chantial 

Volz GUILTY of Count One of the Indictment, charging a violation of Title 21 U.S.C. § 846 - 

Conspiracy to Distribute or Possess with Intent to Distribute or Dispense a Mixture or Substance 

Containing a Detectable Amount of N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] 

propanamide (Fentanyl). 

Case 4:23-cr-00206-ALM-AGD Document 58 Filed 12/02/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:

173
Case 4:23-cr-00206-ALM-AGD Document 58 Filed 12/02/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:

174
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-11-00589- CR

Letitia Dobbin s, Appellan t

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F TRAVIS CO UNTY, 427 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1 -DC- 10- 2019 86, H ONO RAB LE JIM CO RONADO , JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant L etitia Dobbins has filed a pro se notice of appea l from the district court’s judgme nt placing her on community supervision following her plea of guilty to the offe nse of possession of a controlled substance, coca ine. See Tex. Hea lth & Safety Code Ann. § 481.115(a) -(b) (West 2010). The dist rict court has cert i fi ed t h at this is a plea-bar g ain case, t he defenda nt has no rig ht of appea l, and the defe ndant has waived the rig ht of appea l. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a) (2), (d). Acc ording ly , we dismiss the appea l.

__________________________________________ Bob Pembe rton, J ustice Be fore Chief Justice Jones, J ustices Pemberton a nd Henson Dismissed Filed: Nove mber 4, 2011 Do Not Publish
Exhibit 99.1

  Statement of Chief Executive Officer of Safety Components International, Inc.
    Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to ss. 906 of the
                           Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

      In connection with the Annual Report of Safety Components International,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended March 29, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, John C. Corey, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.


/S/ John C. Corey
-----------------
John C. Corey
Chief Executive Officer and President
June 23, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Safety Components International,
Inc. and will be retained by Safety Components International, Inc. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Joshua WOLF, Petitioner, v. Cindy GRIFFITH, Warden.

No. 19-7243

Supreme Court of the United States.

February 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Maurice McLAIN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-5309.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT (10)(A)



 EXHIBIT (10)(a) 

Consent of Counsel 







 [Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP] 

April 16, 2012 
 Board of Directors

 Transamerica Advisors Life Insurance Company of New York 
 ML of New York Variable Annuity Separate Account A 
 440 Mamaroneck Avenue 

Harrison, New York 10528 
  

	 	RE:	ML of New York Variable Annuity Separate Account A 


	 	  	 Merrill Lynch Investor Choice AnnuitySM (Investor Series) 



	 	  	File No. 333-119611/811-06466 


Gentlemen: 
 We hereby consent
to the use of our name under the caption “Legal Matters” in the Prospectus contained in Post-Effective Amendment No. 11 to the Registration Statement to Form N-4 (File No. 333-119611) of the ML of New York Variable Annuity
Separate Account A filed by Transamerica Advisors Life Insurance Company of New York with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In giving this consent, we do not admit that we are in the category of persons whose consent is required under
Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933. 
  

			
	Very truly yours,
	
	Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
		
	By:	 	    /s/ Frederick R. Bellamy
		 	    Frederick R. Bellamy
Temarco Sartorio POPE, Jr., Petitioner v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8785

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Lillian PELLEGRINI, petitioners, v. FRESNO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, et al.

No. 18-458.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

I, Thomas P. Maun,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Micro Component Technology, Inc.:

 

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

 

3. Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

 

4. The registrant’sother certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15) for the registrant and we have:

 

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

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation.

 

c) disclosed in this report any changes in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’sother certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function):

 

a) all significant deficiencies and materialweakness in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.

 

 
| Dated: August 5,  2005 | By:                       | /s/ Thomas P.  Maun |   |
|-----------------------------|---------------------------|---------------------|--------|
|                        | Thomas P. Maun            |
|                        | Chief Financial  Officer  |
|                        | Chief Accounting  Officer |

 

----
EXHIBIT 32

                            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 Cadus  Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending  September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, David  Blitz,
President and Chief Executive  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to ss. 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.

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

 /s/ David Blitz
--------------------------------------------------
David Blitz
President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
November 10, 2004

The foregoing  certification is furnished  solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section
1350 and is not being  filed as part of the Report or as a  separate  disclosure
document.
### TEXA S COU RT O F AP PEAL S, THIRD DISTRICT , AT AUST IN

NO. 03-00-00229-CR

Gerald Ma

yo, Appellant
v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE

DISTRICT CO URT OF DALL AS COUNTY, 195TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. F-9402790-SN, HONORAB LE J OHN NELMS, JUDGE PRESIDING

InDecember 1994, appellant Gerald Mayo was placed on defer red adjudication community supervision after pleading guilty to r etaliation. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 36. 06 (West Supp. 2001). In March 2000, appellant pleaded true to the allegations in the State’s motion to adjudicate. The district cour t revoked supervision and adjudicated appellant guilty. Th e c ou rt thenassess ed punishment, enhanced by two previous felony c on victions, at imprisonment for twenty-f ive year s. Appe llant ’s court-appointe d attorney filed a brief concludin

g that th e a ppeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements o f Ander s v. Califor

nia , 386 U. S. 738 (1967 ), by

pre se ntin g a pro fe ss io na

l eva lu at io n o f t he rec ord demo ns tra

ting wh y t here are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Pens on v. Ohio , 488 U. S. 75 (19 88); High v. State , 573 S. W. 2d 807(Tex. Crim. App. 1978) ; Curr ie v. State , 516 S. W. 2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App.2

1974) ; Jacks on v. State , 485 S. W. 2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972) ; Gainous v. State , 436 S. W. 2d 137 (Tex. Cri m. App. 1969). A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant
was advised of his right to examine the appellate recor d and to file apro s e b rief
. No pro se bri ef has been filed. We have reviewed the recor d and counsel’s brief and agree t hat the appe al is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in th e re cord that might ar guably support the appeal. The judgment of conviction is affir med.

Lee Yeakel B efore Chief

Justice Abouss ie, Justices Yeake l and Patter son Affirm ed F iled: F ebruar y 1, 2001 Do Not P ublish
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

# **SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION**

 

The undersignedhereby certify that this report complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the informationcontained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:  May 10, 2006 | By:                                   | /s/ Roger E. Gower |   |
|---------------------------|---------------------------------------|--------------------|--------|
|                      | Roger E. Gower                        |
|                      | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

 
| Dated:  May 10, 2006 | By:                             | /s/ BachThuy T. Vo |   |
|---------------------------|---------------------------------|--------------------|--------|
|                      | BachThuy T. Vo                  |
|                      | Interim Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
William Dante MITCHELL, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5309

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 2, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Stephen D. LEONARD, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 18-5602.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2224

To express the sense of Congress regarding the need to carefully review

proposed changes to the governance structure of the Civil Air Patrol

before any such change is implemented and to require studies by the

Comptroller General and the Inspector General of the Department of

Defense regarding Civil Air Patrol management and operations.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 15, 1999

Mrs. MINK of Hawaii introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Armed

Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To express the sense of Congress regarding the need to

carefully review proposed changes to the governance

structure of the Civil Air Patrol before any such change

is implemented and to require studies by the Comptroller

General and the Inspector General of the Department

of Defense regarding Civil Air Patrol management and

operations.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 2224 IH

1 SECTION 1. MANAGEMENT OF CIVIL AIR PATROL.

2 (a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con3 gress that no major change to the governance structure

4 of the Civil Air Patrol should be mandated until a review

5 of potential improvements in the management and over6 sight of Civil Air Patrol operations is conducted.

7 (b) COMPTROLLER GENERAL STUDY.—The Comp8 troller General shall conduct a study of potential improve9 ments to Civil Air Patrol operations, including Civil Air

10 Patrol financial management, Air Force and Civil Air Pa11 trol oversight, and the Civil Air Patrol safety program.

12 Not later than February 15, 2000, the Inspector General

13 shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the

14 study.

15 (c) INSPECTOR GENERAL REVIEW.—(1) The Inspec16 tor General of the Department of Defense shall review the

17 financial and management operations of the Civil Air Pa18 trol. The review shall include an audit.

19 (2) Not later than February 15, 2000, the Inspector

20 General shall submit to Congress a report on the review,

21 including, specifically, the results of the audit. The report

22 shall include any recommendations that the Inspector

23 General considers appropriate regarding actions necessary

24 to ensure the proper oversight of the financial and man25 agement operations of the Civil Air Patrol.

Æ
Lorenzo HALE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9726

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for further consideration in light of *Rehaif* v. *United States* , 588 U.S. ----, 139 S.Ct. 2191, 204 L.Ed.2d 594 (2019).
Sheldon SCHWARTZ, petitioner, v. HRI HOSPITAL, INC., et al.

No. 18-251.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appeals Court of Massachusetts denied.
_

 IRST AMENDMENT TO REAL 
ESTATE SALE AGREEMENT

 THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO REAL ESTATE SALE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made as of the 19th day of April 2012, between HARTMAN SHORT TERM INCOME PROPERTIES XX, INC., a Maryland corporation, (referred to herein as “Buyer”), and REGENCY CENTERS, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (referred to herein as “Seller”).
 RECITALS:
 A.
 The parties heretofore executed that certain Real Estate Sale Agreement dated March 20, 2012 (the “Contract”), for the purchase and sale of property located in Arlington, Texas, as more particularly described in the Contract.
 B.
 The Buyer and Seller have reached an agreement to amend the terms of the Contract as hereinafter set forth.
 C.
 Except as otherwise expressly provided for herein, capitalized terms used herein shall have the same meaning as set forth in the Contract.
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Seller and Buyer acknowledge and agree as follows: 
 1.
 The Buyer hereby acknowledges that the Buyer has completed its due diligence review of the Property and the Inspection Period shall expire simultaneous with the execution of this Agreement.
 2.
 Section 2.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to reduce the Purchase Price by $187,500.00 to $10,612,500.00.
 3.
 Section 3.3 of the Agreement is hereby amended to change the date and time of closing to May 11th 2012, at 2:00 p.m. CDT or such other time as mutually agreeable to Buyer and Seller. 
 4.
 Section 8.1 (g) is hereby amended to waive the 75% estoppel requirement to allow the seller to provide tenant estoppel letters on a best case basis on or before the closing date.
 5.
 The remaining terms and conditions of the Contract remain in full force and effect.
 6.
 This Agreement may be executed by the parties hereto individually or in combination, in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which will constitute one and the same Agreement.
 7.
 The parties hereby agree that an executed facsimile or pdf copy of this Agreement may be transmitted to either party and be deemed an original for purposes hereof.
 	  
	  
	  


 
 
 
 
 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written.
 	  
	 “SELLER”
 

 REGENCY CENTERS, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership 


 By:  Regency Centers Corporation, a Florida 

 corporation, its General Partner


 By:          Stuart Brackenridge_______   

 Name:  Stuart Brackenridge

 Title:  Vice President

	  
	 

 

 “BUYER”
 
HARTMAN SHORT TERM INCOME PROPERTIES XX, INC., a Maryland corporation
 

 By:       Allen R. Hartman

 Name:  Allen R. Hartman 

 Title:  President
Joseph JASMAN, Petitioner, v. DeWayne BURTON, Warden.

No. 19-6789

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Michigan denied.
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

 

 

 

Patent Armory Inc.,

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

Bose Corporation,

 Defendant. 

 

 Case No. 2:23-cv-00335-JRG 

 Patent Case 

 Jury Trial Demanded 

 

 

PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

 

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), Plaintiff hereby dismisses this 

action without prejudice. Defendant has not yet answered the Complaint or moved for summary 

judgment. 

Dated: August 7, 2023 Respectfully submitted, 

 

 /s/ Isaac Rabicoff 

 Isaac Rabicoff 

 Rabicoff Law LLC 

 600 Mamaroneck Ave STE 400 

 Harrison, NY 10528 

 7736694590 

 isaac@rabilaw.com 

 

 

 Counsel for Plaintiff

 Patent Armory Inc.

 

Case 2:23-cv-00335-JRG Document 7 Filed 08/07/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 62
2 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing document was served on all parties 

who have appeared in this case on August 7, 2023 via the Court’s CM/ECF system. 

 /s/ Isaac Rabicoff 

 Isaac Rabicoff 

Case 2:23-cv-00335-JRG Document 7 Filed 08/07/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 63
Matthew Oliver ALFORD, Petitioner, v. Erik A. HOOKS, Secretary, North Carolina Department of Safety, et al.

No. 18-9178

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 07, 2019

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