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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          16,143
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  211,736
<ALLOWANCES>                                    99,367
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               282,914
<PP&E>                                          59,933
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 831,159
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          275,162
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            86
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   831,159
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,166,340
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  841,936
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               323,528
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,667
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (12,791)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (891)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (11,778)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00


</TABLE>
# C_2016119EN.01000101.xml

| 5.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 119/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 119/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7937 — Computer Sciences Corporation/Xchanging)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 119/01)

On 30 March 2016, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M7937. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M7937. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of ADESA, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, David G. Gartzke, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 USC 1350), that:

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| /s/    DAVID G. GARTZKE                     |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| David G. Gartzke                                                |   |
| *President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman  of the Board* |

 

*This certification accompanies the Report pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except tothe extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by theCompany for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended.*

46

----
State of North Carolina v. Ronnie Paul Godbey

No. 443PA16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2017

James R. Grant, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Godbey, Ronnie Paul.

Anita LeVeaux, Assistant Attorney General, Brandy Cook, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

G. Glenn Gerding, Attorney at Law, Southport.

Amy Bircher, Assistant Attorney General.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 6th of December 2016 by Defendant 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:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th of January 2017."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).
Animaw AZIGE, Tewodros Abebe, Meseret Tefera, Zenash Abey, Tadese Gebregiorgis, Dawit Getahun, Edom A. Geru, Azemerawu Getaneh, Tsige Kibret, Tewodrose G. Tirfe, Hailu Afro, Mequanint Tsegaw, Zebene Mesele, Meaza Jembere, Nigatu Kassa, Almaz Mekonen, Aster Mles, Addisu Fentahum Ayalwe, Askale Yeshanew, and Haimonot Gedamu v. HOLY TRINITY ETHIOPIAN ORTHODOX TEWAHDO CHURCH, Solomon Gugsa, Luleseged Deribe, Tesfa Gashareba, Samuel Agonafer, Samson Kassaye, Gedewon Kassa, Yohannes Assefa, Tassew Kassahun, and Eyoel Mulugeta

No. 368P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 16, 2017

Sinead Noelle O'Doherty, Attorney at Law.

Matthew F. Tilley, Attorney at Law, Julian H. Wright, Jr., Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Kassahun, Tassew.

Forrest A. Norman, Attorney at Law.

John T. Holden, Attorney at Law, Joseph L. Nelson, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, Christopher M. Vann, Attorney at Law, Matthews, for Azige, Animaw, et al.

Earl N. 'Trey' Mayfield, III, Attorney at Law, F. Hill Allen, IV, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Gashareba, Tesfa.

*291***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by Plaintiffs on the 5th of October 2016 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30 (substantial constitutional question), the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the notice of appeal is

"Dismissed Ex Mero Motu by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of March 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 5th of October 2016 by Plaintiffs 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 16th of March 2017."

Ervin, J. recused
STATE v. Christopher Glenn TURNER

440P16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 6, 2016

Daniel Lawrence Spiegel, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Turner, Christopher Glenn.

Christopher W. Brooks, Assistant Attorney General, David Learner, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 6th of December 2016 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th of December 2016."
QUALITY BUILT HOMES INCORPORATED, et al. v. TOWN OF CARTHAGE

315PA15-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 6, 2017

James E. Scarbrough, Attorney at Law, James R. DeMay, Attorney at Law, Concord, John F. Scarborough, Attorney at Law, for Quality Built Homes Incorporated, et al.

Susan K. Burkhart, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Town of Carthage.

Stephen D. Feldman, Attorney at Law, Paul M. Cox, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Steven A. Scoggan, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, F. Paul Calamita, III, Attorney at Law, for N.C. Water Quality Association and Seven Municipalities.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 6th of July 2017 by Plaintiffs:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th of July 2017."

Plaintiffs shall have up to and including the 7th day of August 2017 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.

M. C. Hackney Assistant Clerk, Supreme Court Of North Carolina
State of North Carolina ex rel. Commissioner of Insurance v. North Carolina Rate Bureau

In the Matter of the Filing Dated January 3, 2014 by the North Carolina Rate Bureau for Revised Homeowners' Insurance Rates & Homeowners' Insurance Territory Definitions

No. 333P16-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 14, 2017

R. Michael Strickland, Attorney at Law, Marvin M. Spivey, Jr., Attorney at Law, Glenn C. Raynor, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for The North Carolina Rate Bureau.

William M. Trott, Attorney at Law, Raleigh.

Sherri L. Hubbard, Attorney at Law, Patricia Ford, for North Carolina Department Of Insurance.

Robert Devane Croom, IV, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Jonathan L. Crook, Attorney at Law, Raleigh.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th of January 2017 by N.C. Rate Bureau in this matter for for Reconsideration, 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 14th of February 2017."
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

Please note that the time and venue for the Federal Communications Commission's September Open Meeting has changed. 

As described in the Commission's Thursday, September 8th Notice, on Thursday, September 15th, the Commission will hold an open meeting. At this meeting, it will hear presentations from Commission staff and various industry representatives concerning their role in Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts. For the convenience of those testifying, the Federal Communications Commission will hold its meeting in Atlanta, Georgia at BellSouth Telecommunications Inc.’s Emergency Control Center located at the following address: 

BellSouth Midtown I Building, 4th Floor, 754 Peachtree Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30309. 

The meeting is scheduled to commence at 11 a.m. Seating is limited and will be on a first come, first serve basis. 

The prompt and orderly conduct of Commission business permits less than 7-days notice be given. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 05-18693 Filed 9-15-05; 3:43 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
EXHIBIT 99-1



CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL
REPORTS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350



The undersigned
hereby certifies that he is the duly appointed and acting Chief Executive Officer of CKE Restaurants, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), and hereby further certifies as follows.



1. The periodic report containing financial statements to which this
certificate is an exhibit fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.



2. The information contained in the periodic report to which this certificate is an exhibit fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.



In witness
whereof, the undersigned has executed and delivered this certificate as of the date set forth opposite his signature below.



|Date: March 26, 2003 |  |  |  | /s/    ANDREW F.
PUZDERAndrew F. Puzder Chief Executive Officer
|-------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------



CKE RESTAURANTS, INC.



1
EX-10.3



 Exhibit 10.3 
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE 
 MOODY’S CORPORATION 

CAFETERIA PLAN 
 (EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2008) 
 Section 2.14 of the Moody’s
Corporation Cafeteria Plan (effective January 1, 2008) is hereby amended as follows, effective as of the date this First Amendment is adopted: 
 “Eligible Employee” means any full-time or part-time Employee who is regularly scheduled to work at least 20 hours per week for the Employer, and is eligible to participate in the Plan in
accordance with Section 3.1; provided, that the term Eligible Employee shall not include any limited duration Employee who commenced or recommenced employment on or after May 1, 2014 except to the extent coverage is required by the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 07-5109

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

DERRICK E. JOHNSON, 

 Defendant – Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior 

District Judge. (3:06-cr-00523-REP-1) 

Submitted: September 30, 2008 Decided: October 21, 2008 

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Michael S. Nachmanoff, Federal Public Defender, Frances H. 

Pratt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Alexandria, Virginia, 

for Appellant. Chuck Rosenberg, United States Attorney, Richard 

D. Cooke, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

 
PER CURIAM: 

 Derrick E. Johnson pled guilty to two counts of 

possessing with intent to distribute cocaine base “crack” and to 

one count of possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug 

trafficking crime under 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(c) (West Supp. 2008). 

Johnson was sentenced to 147 months of imprisonment: 

eighty-seven months each for the drug counts, to be served 

concurrently to each other, and sixty months on the firearm 

count, to be served consecutively to the drug counts. On 

appeal, Johnson’s sole issue is that he did not knowingly and 

voluntarily plead guilty to the § 924(c) charge because the 

district court* failed to advise him of the nature of the offense 

and there was an insufficient factual basis to support the plea. 

For the reasons that follow, we affirm. 

 Because he failed to challenge the propriety of his 

plea colloquy in the district court, Johnson concedes we review 

the issue for plain error. United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 

58-59 (2002); United States v. Martinez, 277 F.3d 517, 527 (4th 

Cir. 2002). We find no reversible error as the record reveals 

that Johnson was informed about the nature of the § 924(c) 

offense, that there was a factual basis for the plea, and that 

 *

 Johnson’s plea hearing was conducted by a magistrate judge 

based on his waiver of his right to proceed before a district 

judge for his Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing. 

2 
3 

he knowingly and voluntarily pled guilty to the offense. United 

States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 116 (4th Cir. 1991); see United 

States v. Wilson, 81 F.3d 1300, 1307 (4th Cir 1996) (“The Court 

has repeatedly refused to script the Rule 11 colloquy, relying 

rather on the experience and wisdom of the district judges 

below.”). 

 Accordingly, we affirm. 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. 

AFFIRMED
COOPER v. BERGER, et al.

52PA17-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 14, 2017

D. Martin Warf, Attorney at Law, Noah H. Huffstetler, III, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Candace S. Friel, Attorney at Law, Winston-Salem, for Berger, Philip E.

Jim W. Phillips, Jr., Attorney at Law, Greensboro, Eric M. David, Attorney at Law, Daniel F.E. Smith, Attorney at Law, for Cooper, Roy A. (III).

Grayson Kelley, Chief Deputy.

Alexander McC. Peters, Special Deputy Attorney General, Alexander McC. Peters, Senior Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

John R. Wester, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, J. Dickson Phillips, III, Attorney at Law, Chapel Hill, Adam K. Doerr, Attorney at Law, Kevin Crandall, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Hunt, James B., Jr., et al.

Andrew H. Erteschik, Attorney at Law, for Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, et al.

Allison J. Riggs, Attorney at Law, Anita S. Earls, Attorney at Law, Emily E. Seawell, Attorney at Law, for County Board Members.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 10th of August 2017 by Defendants:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of August 2017."

Defendants shall have up to and including the 23rd day of August 2017 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois  60604

Argued September 27, 2007

Decided August 28, 2008

Before

      WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge

KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge

      MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

Nos. 06‐3328, 06‐3488 & 06‐3563

LARRY MAYES,

Plaintiff‐Appellee,

Cross‐Appellant,

v.

CITY OF HAMMOND and MICHAEL

SOLAN,

Defendants‐Appellants,

and

RAYMOND MYSZAK and FRANK

DUPEY,

Defendants,

Cross‐Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District

Court for the Northern District of Indiana,

Hammond Division.

No. 03 C 379

Paul R. Cherry,

Magistrate Judge.

O R D E R

These consolidated appeals were argued on September 27, 2007.  Nearly six months

later we granted the parties’ motion to stay proceedings pending the outcome of their

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
Nos. 06‐3328, 06‐3488 & 06‐3563 Page 2

settlement efforts.  On June 26, 2008, the parties filed a joint motion to vacate the underlying

jury verdict and judgment as a condition to the proposed settlement agreement they had

reached.  We issued a limited remand to the district court to allow the court to inform us if it

was inclined to vacate the jury verdict and judgment.  See U.S. Bancorp Mortgage Co. v.

Bonner Mall Partnership, 513 U.S. 18 (1994); Marseilles Hydro Power LLC v. Marseilles Land &

Water Co., 481 F.3d 1002 (7th Cir. 2007). In response the district court issued an Opinion and

Order on August 15, 2008, advising us that it is inclined to grant the joint request to vacate

the jury verdict and judgment.  Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the district court

for further proceedings.
Exhibit 10.29

                                  AMENDMENT TO
                             1994 STOCK OPTION PLAN
                                       OF
                                  HEMASURE INC.

     The 1994 Stock Option Plan, as amended (the "Plan") be and hereby is
amended as follows:

     1.   The third sentence of Section 3(a) shall be deleted in its entirety
          and a new sentence inserted in lieu thereof which shall read as
          follows:

          "No employee shall be granted options to purchase more than an
          aggregate of 600,000 shares of Common Stock under the Plan in any one
          Calendar year."

     2.   The number 1,000,000 in the third line of Section 4 of the Plan shall
          be deleted and the number 2,500,000 shall be inserted in lieu thereof.








               Adopted by the Board of Directors on March 31, 1996 Approved by
               the Stockholders on May 16, 1996





<PAGE>
In the MATTER OF: A.H., C.H.

No. 6P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2017

Peter Wood, Attorney at Law, for Hawes, Antoinette.

Bettyna Belly Abney, Assistant County Attorney, for Durham County DSS.

Marie Hare Mobley, Attorney at Law, for GAL.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 5th of January 2017 by Respondent (Mother) 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 3rd of May 2017."
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

October 27, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 137065 Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137065 

 COA: 278459 

Ionia CC: 06-013425-FH 

JOSEPH GEORGE SIAN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 1, 2008 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d1020 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

October 27, 2008 

 Clerk
14 **OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN** 

# I c _-- : ’ I a3-a Jg&Yata dvla6#2U.

aetrj, . . . maoi ovrpu in aaranob t3 tk0 5wrotaxy 0s aate, a8 fromthat

time downtu wad Inoluding the 30thda of April n4xt rollowia&. only.?UQ!l propextionate

Dartof ts mllnoalIt 1s to be noted, under the abow statutu, **t&at** the **trsnahise tnx**  **le oauaod**  to **so&m and**  **become due**  II ttw corporatlon's 

### hwxhhis4

and rigriti

undez. tte or rather

than xapan**its** legal right to Co busineo~ thereunder. In this ecumotion the oourt sarldr