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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                       <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             12-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         348,979               1,023,598
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,158,432                 720,438
<ALLOWANCES>                                    33,007                  33,770
<INVENTORY>                                  1,962,137                 599,270
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,619,843               2,469,215
<PP&E>                                         688,837                 385,222
<DEPRECIATION>                                 257,434                 170,490
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,051,246               2,683,947
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,162,350                 676,451
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                         9,142                   9,124
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,861,813               1,998,372
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,051,246               2,683,947
<SALES>                                      6,553,331               6,762,361
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,131,096               6,797,111
<CGS>                                        3,853,959               3,256,794
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,818,721               5,146,764
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,312,375               1,650,347
<INCOME-TAX>                                   493,816                 522,694
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            818,559               1,127,653
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   818,559               1,127,653
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .09                     .13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09                     .12


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

                    CNA SURETY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
                            AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1999

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                          COMPANY                               INCORPORATED IN
                          -------                               ---------------
<S>                                                             <C>
CNA Surety Corporation......................................         Delaware
Capsure Holdings Corp. (f/k/a Nucorp, Inc.).................         Delaware
  Capsure Financial Group, Inc..............................         Oklahoma
     (f/k/a/ Nucorp Energy of Oklahoma, Inc.)
       NI Acquisition Corp..................................            Texas
       SI Acquisition Corp..................................            Texas
          Surewest Financial Corp...........................     South Dakota
            Surety Bonding Company of America...............     South Dakota
            Western Surety Company..........................     South Dakota
               Troy Fain Insurance, Inc.....................          Florida
       Universal Surety Holding Corp........................            Texas
          Universal Surety of America.......................            Texas
</TABLE>
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2014 of 4 November 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 1194/2014                     

# of 4 November 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 Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing                           a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79,                           (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007(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, 4 November 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 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
STATE of North Carolina v. Richard Pliney PURSER.

No. 221P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 26, 2008.

Bruce T. Cunningham, Jr., Southern Pines, Lori Hamilton-DeWitt, Mocksville, for Purser.

William P. Hart, Senior Deputy Attorney General, John Snyder, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 15th day of May 2008 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Stanly County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th day of August 2008."
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-51077

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

SALVADOR ANTONIO DAMIAN LOPEZ, also known as Salvador Cruz Guillen,

also know as Salvador Antoni Damian Lopez, also known as Don Chava, also

known as Pappy, also known as Apa

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:03-CR-2338-3

Before GARZA, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Salvador Antonio Damian Lopez has

moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Damian Lopez has not filed a timely response.

Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no

nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 20, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-51077

2

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein,

and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
----

(2004/C 33 E/234)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2172/03

by Johanna Boogerd-Quaak (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 June 2003)

Subject:   Support for rural development

With reference to the resolution adopted by the European Parliament on 5 June 2003 on the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2826/2000, and bearing in mind the opinion of the European Parliament set out in paragraph 1 thereof, can the Commission answer the following questions:

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 2003)

The Commission has taken careful note of the Parliament resolution of 5 June 2003 on the proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 on support for rural development (1), in the context of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform.

Preparation of any such typology could only be considered for the preparation of rural development policy post-2006. However, even with this longer-term perspective, the Commission is not convinced that a common typology defined at Community level is necessary for the implementation of Community rural development policy, nor that a single common typology could take account of the wide diversity of rural situations which will exist in an enlarged Union. Under Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations (2), it is currently the responsibility of the Member States when preparing their rural development programmes to define what they consider to be rural areas, within their specific national and/or regional contexts.

To find out more about the difficulties facing ‘suburban’ rural areas, in September 2002 the Commission launched a special study entitled ‘Urban-rural relations in Europe’ under the ESPON programme (European Spatial Planning Observatory Network).

----

(1)  COM(2003) 23 final.

(2)OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

----
Letter from Dan Vallado



 Exhibit 10.12 

 

 

  

			
	 Date:
	  	October 6, 2010
	 To:
	  	Board of Directors

 I, Dan Valladao, hereby waive any
rights pertaining to 5(f)(iii) of my employment agreement with GreenCell as provided for in Exhibit 10.6 of GreenCell’s Form S-1 Registration Statement filing. Specifically, I hereby waive my termination rights with good reason due to the
location of GreenCell’s principal executive offices out of Central Florida to New York state, including the waiver of any post termination payments specifically in connection with the relocation of GreenCell’s offices to New
York.
  

	
	 s/s

	Dan Valladao, CEO, Chairman of the Board
<PAGE>

CERTIFICATION                                                       EXHIBIT 32.1

            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                    (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,
                   Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a)
and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Western Wireless Corporation, a Washington corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

    The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 (the
    "Form 10-Q") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section
    13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information
    contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
    financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:  August 8, 2003

                                        By: /s/ JOHN W. STANTON
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            John W. Stanton
                                            Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

    The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,
Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code).
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 506/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 506/2013 of 31 May 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 506/2013                     

# of 31 May 2013

# 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, 31 May 2013.

*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.
CAROLINA FIRST BANK v. STARK, INC. and Marcel Stark.

No. 369P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 5, 2009.

K. Edward Greene, Tobias S. Hampson, Raleigh, for Stark.

Mark P. Henriques, Sarah Motley, Charlotte, for Carolina First Bank.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 660 S.E.2d 641.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendants on the 11th day of August 2008 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of *685the Court of Appeals, 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 5th day of February 2009."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 11th day of August 2008 by Defendants 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 5th day of February 2009."
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 457 

To extend the date on which the National Security Personnel System will 

first apply to certain defense laboratories. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 31, 2007 

Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. BROWN, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. BINGAMAN, 

Mrs. CLINTON, Mr. DOMENICI, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. 

LOTT, and Mr. REED) introduced the following bill; which was read twice 

and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 

Affairs 

A BILL 

To extend the date on which the National Security Personnel 

System will first apply to certain defense laboratories. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DATE OF APPLICATION OF NA4 TIONAL SECURITY PERSONNEL SYSTEM TO 

5 DEFENSE LABORATORIES. 

6 Section 9902(c)(1) of title 5, United States Code, is 

7 amended by striking ‘‘October 1, 2008’’ each place such 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•S 457 IS

1 term appears and inserting ‘‘October 1, 2011’’ in each 

2 such place. 

Æ 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
STATE v. POPE.

No. COA08-440.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 18, 2008.

Certification Date December 8, 2008.

Appeal from New Hanover (05CRS59997, 05CRS60003, 05CRS60006, 05CRS60007, 05CRS60010, 05CRS60302, 05CRS60305, 06CRS714).

Case reported without published opinion. Vacated as to 05CRS59997, 05CRS60305, 05CRS60003. No Prejudicial Error as to Habitual Felon. Remaining Charges Remanded for Resentencing.
In the Matter of M.G., et al.

No. 36PA08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 26, 2008.

Lisa Skinner-Lefler, Raleigh, for Mother, Brandi G.

Beth Hall, Attorney Advocate, for Guardian ad Litem.

Annick Lenoir-Peek, Houston, TX, for Felix R.

Lisa Lefler, for Brandi G.

Elizabeth Kennedy-Gurnee, Fayetteville, for Cumberland County DSS.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 27th day of March 2008 by Petitioner (Cumberland County DSS) to Deem Petition Timely Filed:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 26th day of August 2008."
# C_2023329EN.01003701.xml

| 18.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/37

---

Action brought on 27 July 2023 — Hamburger Sparkasse v SRB

(Case T-468/23)

(2023/C 329/54)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Hamburger Sparkasse AG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: F. Kruis and N. Bartmann, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 2 May 2023 on the calculation of the 2023 ex-ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2023/23) together with annexes, at least in so far as it concerns the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 2 May 2023 on the calculation of the 2023 ex-ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2023/23) together with annexes, at least in so far as it concerns the applicant;

| — | order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on eight pleas in law which are identical to those relied on in Case T-410/23, BAWAG PSK v SRB.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-1119

In Re: WILLIAM HENRY COLEMAN, 

 Petitioner. 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. 

(3:96-cr-00010-TWB-1) 

Submitted: April 16, 2009 Decided: April 27, 2009 

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. 

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

William Henry Coleman, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

William Henry Coleman petitions for a writ of 

mandamus, alleging the district court has refused to review a 

motion that he filed pursuant to Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. 

Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 (1944). He seeks an order 

from this court directing the district court to review his 

motion. Our review of the docket sheet reveals that the 

district court considered the motion and dismissed it as 

unsubstantiated on January 7, 2009. Accordingly, because the 

district court has recently acted on Coleman’s motion, we deny 

the mandamus petition as moot. We grant leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis. We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

PETITION DENIED