alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FORM 10-K/A
      SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
        Washington, D.C.  20549
 [X]  15, ANNUAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES
      EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended:
                   6/30/03
                      OR
 [ ]  15, TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE
      SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
      For the transition period from     to

          Commission file number: 0-22965

           Pinnacle Resources, Inc.
     (Exact name of Small Business Issuer in its charter)

      WYOMING                       84-1414869
(State or other jurisdiction of          (I.R.S. Employer
incorporation or organization           Identification No.)

 9600 E. Arapahoe Road, Suite 260,
  Englewood, Colorado                   80112
(Address of principal executive offices)        (Zip Code)

Registrant's Telephone number, including area code:
  (303) 705-8600

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:       None
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
   Common  Stock, $.00001 par value

Check whether Pinnacle (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act during the
preceding 12 months (or such shorter period that Pinnacle was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for at least the past 90 days.
     Yes [x] No [ ]

Check if there is no disclosure of delinquent filers in response to
Item 405 of Regulation S-B is not contained in this form, and no
disclosure will be contained, to the best of Company's knowledge, in
definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this Form 10-KSB or any amendment to this Form 10-KSB.  [x]



This Amendment to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Pinnacle is filed
solely to include the forms of Exhibits 99.1, 99.2, 99.3 and 99.4 (the
Certifications pursuant to Regulation S-K).



<PAGE>2

                 SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, Pinnacle has duly caused this Report
to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned duly authorized person.

Date:    October 9, 2003

Pinnacle Resources, Inc.

/s/ Glen R. Gamble
------------------------------------
By:     Glen R. Gamble, President

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, this report has been signed below by the following persons on
behalf of Pinnacle and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                  <c>
/s/ Glen R. Gamble                                 10/9/2003
- ------------------------------
Glen R. Gamble
President  and  Director
(chief executive officer)


/s/ Robert A. Hildebrand                            10/9/2003
- ------------------------------
Date:
Robert A. Hildebrand
Secretary/Treasurer and Director
(Chief Financial Officer)
</TABLE>
STATE v. RIDLEY.

No. COA03-1543-2.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed May 6, 2008.

Certification Date May 27, 2008.

Appeal from Craven (03CRS2594, 03CRS51405, 03CRS51406, 03CRS51407, 03CRS51408, 03CRS51409).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
STATE v. Dane LOCKLEAR, Jr.

No. 578A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 2, 2008.

William P. Hart, Jr., Valerie Spalding, Special Deputy Attorney Generals, L. Johnson Britt, III, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 2nd day of January 2008 by Defendant to Bypass N.C. Court of Appeals in Indictment Numbers 00CRS4643, 4644 and 4645:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 2nd day of January 2008."
**Exhibit 32.01**

The following certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated byreference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language in any filings. 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND 

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

In connectionwith the annual report on Form 10-K of SigmaTel, Inc., a Delaware corporation, for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), each of the undersigned officers of SigmaTel,Inc. certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his respective 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 SigmaTel, Inc. for the periods presented therein. 

Date: February 29, 2008 

/s/Phillip E. Pompa

Phillip E. Pompa 

Chief Executive Officer 

Date:February 29, 2008 

/s/ R. Scott Schaefer

R. Scott Schaefer 

Chief Financial Officer 

A signed original of the above certification has been provided to SigmaTel, Inc. and will be retained by SigmaTel, Inc.and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 32.2

Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b)

of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

I, Lauren P. Silvernail, hereby certify pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that the Quarterly Report of ISTA Pharmaceuticals, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007 fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of ISTA
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.



|                       |  |  |  |  |  |                                                                                          
|---------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                       |  |  | 
|Date: November 6, 2007 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Lauren P. Silvernail                                                                 
|                       |  |  |  |  |  | Lauren P. Silvernail                                                                     
|                       |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer & Vice President, Corporate Development

This certification accompanies the Quarterly Report pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Exhibit 32.1

RECKSON ASSOCIATES REALTY CORP.

Certification of Scott H. Rechler, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, President and Director 
of Reckson Associates Realty Corp., 
Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States
Code

I, Scott H. Rechler, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, President and Director of Reckson Associates Realty Corp. (the Company), certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

| | 1) | The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005 (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.                                                                                             
|

Dated: August 8, 2005

| | By | /s/ Scott H. Rechler                     
| | -- | -----------------------------------------
| |    |                                          
| |    | Scott H. Rechler,                        
| |    | Chairman of the Board, Chief             
| |    | Executive Officer, President and Director

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

---
Wilson MYERS, Administrator of The Estate of Timothy James Tickle, and Cynthia Myers v. Billy BRYANT, Sheriff of Lee County, North Carolina, and Lee County, North Carolina.

No. 607P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 6, 2008.

James R. Morgan, Bradley O. Wood, Winston-Salem, for Bryant.

Stanley W. West, Southern Pines, for Myers, et al.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th day of December 2007 by Defendant (Billy Bryant) in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of March 2008."
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 429/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 429/2014 of 25 April 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 429/2014                     

# of 25 April 2014

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 25 April 2014.

*For the Commission*,                           

*On behalf of the President*,                           

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT

     We hereby consent to the incororation by reference of our report on OraLabs
Holding Corp. dated February 24, 1998 in the Registration Statement on Form S-8,
as  included  in the  OraLabs  Holding  Corp's  Form  10-KSB  for the year ended
December  31,  1998  and  to  all  references  to  our  firm  included  in  such
Registration Statement.

                                             /s/  Schumacher & Associates, Inc.
                                            -----------------------------------
                                            Schumacher & Associates, Inc.


March 31, 1999
Denver, Colorado
<PAGE>
 
                                 EXHIBIT 12.1
                                        

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGE:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
 
                                                                          THREE MONTHS ENDED   THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                            MARCH 31, 1998       MARCH 31, 1997
                                                                          ------------------   -------------------
        <S>                                                                      <C>                  <C>
         Income (Loss) before provision for income taxes                          $3,074               $  825
           Add fixed charges
             Interest costs including amortization of debt
             issuance cost                                                           268                  162
                                                                                  ------               ------
         Earnings                                                                 $3,342               $  987
                                                                                  ======               ======
         Fixed Charges
           Interest expense including amortization of debt
            issuance cost                                                            268                  162
           Capitalized interest                                                      946                1,338
                                                                                  ------               ------
         Total Fixed Charges                                                       1,214                1,500
                                                                                  ======               ======
 
         Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                                         2.75                  .66
 
         Excess (Deficiency) of Earnings to Cover Fixed Charges                   $2,128               $ (513)
</TABLE>

                                                                   Page 21 of 21
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-50673 Conference Calendar

BENNIE FINISTER, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus T. STANDRIDGE; W. HOPKINS, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-96-CV-7

- - - - - - - - - - - April 16, 1999 Before JONES, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The motion filed by Bennie Finister, Texas state prisoner #649506, for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is DENIED. Finister has failed to identify a nonfrivolous issue for appeal. The district court did not err in certifying that an appeal would be frivolous. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); Baugh v. Taylor , 117 F.3d 197, 202 n.24 (5th Cir. 1997); 5th Cir. R. 42.2.O R D E R No. - 2 - IFP MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 419/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 419/2014 of 24 April 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 419/2014                     

# of 24 April 2014

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 24 April 2014.

*For the Commission*,                           

*On behalf of the President*,                           

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
# C_2023216EN.01002801.xml

| 19.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 216/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 216/28

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 5 April 2023 — Consorzio Leonardo Servizi e Lavori ‘Società Cooperativa Consortile Stabile’ v Consip SpA

(Case C-226/23, Consorzio Leonardo Servizi e Lavori)

(2023/C 216/38)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Consorzio Leonardo Servizi e Lavori ‘Società Cooperativa Consortile Stabile’, PH Facility Srl

Respondent: Consip SpA

Question referred

Do Articles 16, 49, 50 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 4 of Protocol No 7 to the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 6 TEU, the principles of proportionality, competition, freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services laid down in Articles 49, 50, 54 and 56 TFEU preclude national rules (Articles 38(1)(f), 48 and 75 of decreto legislativo n. 163 del 2006) (Legislative Decree No 163 of 2006) which provide for the application of the penalty of forfeiture of the provisional security, as an automatic consequence of the exclusion of an economic operator from a procedure for the award of a public service contract, irrespective of whether or not that economic operator has been awarded the contract?

---
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 39542

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

JAMIE LEE NAPPO,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 653

Filed: October 1, 2012

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED 

OPINION AND SHALL NOT 

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Bannock County. Hon. Stephen S. Dunn, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of eighteen years, with a minimum 

period of confinement of eight years, for first degree kidnapping and concurrent 

unified term of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of eight 

years, for attempted first degree murder, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Jamie Lee Nappo pled guilty to first degree kidnapping, I.C. § 18-4502, and attempted 

first degree murder, I.C. §§ 18-4001, 18-4002, 18-4003, 18-306, and 18-204. The district court 

sentenced Nappo to a unified term of eighteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of 

eight years for first degree kidnapping and a current unified term of fifteen years, with a 

minimum period of confinement of eight years, for attempted first degree murder. Nappo

appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 
2

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Nappo’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
STATE of North Carolina v. Tommie Earl MYLES.

No. 41A08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 6, 2008.

John P. Scherer, II, Assistant Attorney General, Michael Bonfoey, District Attorney, for State of NC.

Constance E. Widenhouse, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Myles.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 654 S.E.2d 752.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 28th day of January 2008 *538for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of March 2008."