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

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE STATEMENTS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND AS OF
MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                  0000919604
<NAME> KERATOPLANETES CORP
<MULTIPLIER>                    1
<CURRENCY>                      US dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Mar-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 Apr-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   Mar-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,453
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1,274
<OTHER-SE>                                     (3,548)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  65
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (65)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (65)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (65)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.00)


</TABLE>
This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 228235, styled The State of Texas v. Randall Douglas, in County 1

Court No. 7, Bexar County, the Honorable Monica Guerrero presiding.

We further note that relator’s petition for writ of mandamus was postmarked on August 13, 2008 and was filed 2

with this court on August 14, 2008. The Bexar County District Clerk shows that relator was sentenced in Cause No.

228235 on August 14, 2008.

i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00617-CR

IN RE Randall DOUGLAS

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: August 29, 2008

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On August 14, 2008, relator Randall Douglas filed a petition for writ of mandamus,

complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Release for

Delay of Prosecution and Excessive Bail and his Motion for Reduction of Bond. We conclude trial 2

counsel is also relator’s counsel for an original proceeding on the issue presented. Relator is not

entitled to hybrid representation. See Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995).

The absence of a right to hybrid representation means relator’s pro se petition will be treated as
04-08-00617-CR

-2-

presenting nothing for this court’s review. See id.; see also Gray v. Shipley, 877 S.W.2d 806, 806

(Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1994, orig. proceeding). Accordingly, relator’s petition is denied.

Relator’s motion for leave to file the petition for writ of mandamus is denied as moot.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                             494
<SECURITIES>                                     9,473
<RECEIVABLES>                                      379
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,436
<PP&E>                                          19,208
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (6,484)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  25,167
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,784
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       102,569
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    25,167
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,593
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,075
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,859
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 946
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (29,239)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (29,239)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
----

(2004/C 65 E/212)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2710/03

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(11 September 2003)

Subject:   Incense

In Ireland there is currently a debate about the health effects of burning incense. Jim McDade, a minister in the Irish government, has issued a warning about the potentially carcinogenic effects of smoke from incense.

Is the Commission aware of this debate?

What, in the Commission's view, are the health risks associated with inhaling smoke from incense?

If it is harmful, what steps will the Commission take to warn the public?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(3 November 2003)

There are no special European regulations concerning health warnings on commercial products containing incense such as incense cones or candles.

The Commission services are aware of isolated media reports of concern over high levels of potentially carcinogenic substances in the air resulting from burning incense in different settings in Asia. There is no scientific evidence to suggest a comparable situation in the European Union.

Consequently, the Commission is not currently planning to issue a warning to the public on this matter.

However, if the Honourable Member has any scientific evidence, the Commission will be happy to have it examined.

----
Amendment No. 1 to the University of Miami License Agreement



 Exhibit 10.7 
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO LICENSE AGREEMENT 
 BETWEEN 

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI 
 AND 
 SEATTLE GENETICS, INC. 

This Amendment No. 1 to License Agreement (the “Amendment”) is made as of August 4, 2000 by and
between University of Miami and its School of Medicine, whose principal place of business is at 1600 N.W.
10th Avenue, Miami, Florida 33136 (“Licensor”),
and Seattle Genetics, Inc., a Delaware corporation having offices at 22215 26th Avenue SE, Bothell, WA 98021 (“Licensee”). 
 WHEREAS, Licensor and
Licensee are parties to that certain License Agreement dated September 20, 1999 (the “Agreement”) 

WHEREAS, Licensor and Licensee wish to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment; 

NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as
follows: 
  

	 	1.	Section 8.1(d) is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 


 

	 	“(d)	Running Royalty in an amount equal to (i) one percent (1%) of the Net Sales of the Non-Conjugated Products and Conjugated Products and (ii) two percent
(2%) on the Net Sales of the Non-Conjugated products and Conjugated Products equal to or exceeding two hundred fifty million dollars ($250,000,000.00) for the years six through ten (years 6-10) of this Agreement; provided, that, if royalties
are paid pursuant to (ii) above, (i) shall not apply. 

 The Parties, intending to be legally bound,
have caused this Amendment to be executed by their authorized representatives on the dates set forth below. 
  

									
	UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI	 		 	SEATTLE GENETICS, INC.
					
	By:	 	 /s/: Alan Fish
	 		 	By:	 	 /s/: H. Perry Fell

					
	Name:	 	 Alan Fish
	 		 	Name:	 	 H. Perry Fell

					
	Title:	 	 VP, BNS & DEV
	 		 	Title:	 	 Chief Executive Officer

					
	Date:	 	 8/4/00
	 		 	Date:	 	 July 20, 2000


 [*] Confidential treatment requested
AVOKI v. FEREBEE, et al.

No. 284P15-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Dec. 15, 2015.

Francisco K. Avoki, Chester, for Avoki, Francisco K., et al.

Ekoko K. Avoki.

C. Rob Wilson, Charlotte, Attorney at Law, for Ferebee, Larry Eugene (Jr.), et al.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 10th of August 2015 by Plaintiffs for Notice of Appeal:

> "Motion Dismissed Ex Mero Motu by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of December 2015."

ERVIN, J. recused
See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.041(c) (Vernon 2007). This offense is a state jail 1

felony, punishable by confinement in a state jail for any term of not more than two years

or less than 180 days and a fine not to exceed $10,000. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.35

(Vernon 2007).

NO. 07-08-0174-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

AUGUST 19, 2008

______________________________

JAY GID BRYAN, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE 242ND DISTRICT COURT OF HALE COUNTY;

NO. B 14776-0301; HONORABLE ED SELF, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.

ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND

Appellant Jay Gid Bryan has filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s judgment

adjudicating him guilty of endangering a child, revoking his community supervision and 1

sentencing him to two years confinement in the State Jail Division of the Texas Department

of Criminal Justice. The reporter’s record and clerk’s record have been filed. Appellant’s
2

brief was due to be filed on June 20, 2008, but has not yet been filed. Further, no motion

for extension of time has been filed. 

 By letter dated July 3, 2008, this Court notified appellant’s retained attorney of the

failure and also explained that if no response was received by July 14, 2008, the appeal

would be abated pursuant to Rule 38.8(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. On

July 8, 2008, we received a document entitled “Notice of Nonrepresentation” in which

counsel states he represented appellant at a motion to proceed but was never retained to

represent him on appeal. Accordingly, we now abate this appeal and remand the cause

to the trial court for further proceedings pursuant to Rules 38.8(b)(2) and (3). On remand,

the trial court shall utilize whatever means necessary to determine the following:

1. Whether appellant truly desires to prosecute the appeal; and

2. Whether appellant is indigent and entitled to appointed counsel.

Should it be determined that appellant does want to continue the appeal and is

indigent, and that counsel should be appointed, the name, address, telephone number,

and state bar number of newly appointed counsel shall be included in an order. If

necessary, the trial court shall execute findings of fact, conclusions of law, and any

necessary orders it may enter regarding the aforementioned issues and cause its findings,

conclusions, and orders, if any, to be included in a supplemental clerk’s record. A

supplemental reporter’s record of the hearing, if any, shall also be included in the appellate

record. Finally, the trial court shall file the supplemental clerk’s record and the

supplemental reporter’s record, if any, with the Clerk of this Court by September 19, 2008.
3

It is so ordered. 

Per Curiam

Do not publish.
Exhibit 99.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of NACO Industries, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form  10-QSB  for the  fiscal  quarter  ended May 31,  2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Verne
E. Bray, 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, to the best of my knowledge:

          (1) The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

/s/ Verne E. Bray
---------------------------
Verne E. Bray
Chief Executive Officer
July 14, 2003
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20
- 0 366 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ERICA ANN DION,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including December 1 7 , 2020 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: James Jeremiah Shea Justice, Montana Supreme Court November 12 2020

11/12/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0366
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Captaris, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-Q), I, David Anastasi, the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: November 14, 2003



/s/ DAVID P. ANASTASIDavid P. Anastasi President and Chief Executive Officer
# Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/442Show full title

Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/442 of 16 March 2015 launching the European Union CSDP Military Advisory Mission in the Central            African Republic (EUMAM RCA) and amending Decision 2015/78/CFSP         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/442                     

# of 16 March 2015

# launching the European Union CSDP Military Advisory Mission in the Central African Republic (EUMAM RCA) and amending Decision                        2015/78/CFSP                     

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 42(4) and 43(2) thereof,

Having regard to Council Decision 2015/78/CFSP of 19 January 2015 on a European Union CSDP Military Advisory Mission in the                           Central African Republic (EUMAM RCA)(1), and in particular Article 4 thereof,                        

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

(1)On 19 January 2015, the Council adopted Decision 2015/78/CFSP.

(2)On 9 February 2015, the Council approved the Rules of Engagement of EUMAM RCA.

(3)On 6 March 2015, the Council approved the Mission Plan of EUMAM RCA.

(4)On 11 March 2015, the Political and Security Committee welcomed the letter from the Mission Commander regarding the recommendation                              to launch EUMAM RCA and the envisaged time frame for declaring Initial Operating Capability of EUMAM RCA.

(5)EUMAM RCA should be launched on 16 March 2015.

(6)In accordance with Article 5 of the Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and                              to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark does not participate in the elaboration and the implementation                              of decisions and actions of the Union which have defence implications. Consequently, Denmark does not participate in the implementation                              of this Decision and therefore does not participate in the financing of this mission,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

# Article 1U.K.

The European Union CSDP Military Advisory Mission in the Central African Republic (‘EUMAM RCA’) shall be launched on 16 March                     2015.                  

# Article 2U.K.

The EU Mission Commander of EUMAM RCA is hereby authorised with immediate effect to start execution of the mission.

# Article 3U.K.

Article 4(2) of Decision 2015/78/CFSP is replaced by the following:

‘2.EUMAM RCA shall be launched by a Council Decision on the date recommended by the Mission Commander, following approval of                           the Mission Plan and, if required, of additional Rules of Engagement.’.                  

# Article 4U.K.

This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

Done at Brussels, 16 March 2015.

*For the Council*                            

*The President*                            

F. Mogherini                            

1

OJ L 13, 20.1.2015, p. 8.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 549/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 549/2014 of 21 May 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 549/2014                     

# of 21 May 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, 21 May 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.