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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 1998 and the consolidated statement
of operation for the year then ended and is qualified in its integrity by
reference to such financial statement.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         389,495
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,887,373
<ALLOWANCES>                                   271,544
<INVENTORY>                                  4,503,446
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,702,812
<PP&E>                                       7,144,830
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,140,169
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              32,107,084
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,132,899
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         30
<COMMON>                                        64,328
<OTHER-SE>                                  14,935,029
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,999,387
<SALES>                                     27,052,507
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            27,517,479
<CGS>                                       14,150,026
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               14,150,026
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            12,811,379
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,162,634
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (504,513)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (119,740)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (384,773)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (384,773)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.06)
        

</TABLE>
---

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 Strategic Internet Investments, Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report").
I, Ralph Shearing, Chief Executive Officer of the company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief.

|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sction 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.

|Date: November 28, 2003 | Ralph Shearing                            
|----------------------- | --------------------------------------------
|                        | Ralph Shearing
      Chief Executive Officer

---
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 22.1

 
 
                              SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY
 
 
 
      The following is a list of the subsidiaries of Unit Instruments, Inc. The
      Company owns, directly or indirectly, 100% of the voting securities of
      each subsidiary.

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 

                                                             State of Jurisdiction
Name                                                           or Incorporation
----                                                           ----------------
<S>                                                            <C>
Control Systems, Inc.                                              New Mexico

Unit Foreign Sales Corporation                                   Virgin Islands

Unit Instruments Limited                                            Ireland

Unit Instruments Japan, Inc.                                         Japan

Unit Instruments, GmbH                                              Germany

Unit Instruments Korea Ltd.                                       South Korea
</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesus ORTIZ-HOLGUIN, also known as Jose Esparza, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-50982.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided April 20, 2005.

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

M. Carolyn Fuentes, Federal Public Defender’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before SMITH, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

*615PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jesus Ortiz-Holguin raises arguments that are foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*528 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

i

*

 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.
|     |                                                                                                                         |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of 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/   Abu M. Arif      |
| Name:                  | Abu M. Arif |
| Title:                 | Chief Executive Officer |
|                   | (Principal Executive Officer) |
| Date:                  | August 4, 2014 |
|                   |
|                   |
| /s/   Ross P. Palacios |
| Name:                  | Ross P. Palacios |
| Title:                 | Chief Financial Officer |
|                   | (Principal Financial Officer) |
| Date:                  | August 4, 2014 |
#### HOTEL CORP. v. TAYLOR and FLETCHER v. FOREMANS, INC.

No. 111 PC.

No. 20 (Fall Term).

Case below: 45 N.C. App. 229.

Petition by defendants Fletcher for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 6 May 1980.
1

December 6, 2001

Memorandum to: Peter Turcic

Director, Division of Energy Employees Occupational

Illness Compensation Program

From: Jeffrey L. Kotsch

Certified Health Physicist

Branch of Policies, Regulations & Procedures

Subject: Presence of Ionizing Radiation at Amchitka Nuclear Test Site

This memorandum addresses an issue related to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) of 

Amchitka Island workers. The specific issue concerns when a claimant could have been 

first exposed to ionizing radiation related to the Long Shot, Milrow, or Cannikin 

underground nuclear tests. A member of this SEC is defined in the Energy Employees 

Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA), Section 3621(14)(B) as 

follows: “The employee was so employed before January 1, 1974, by the Department of 

Energy or a Department of Energy contractor or subcontractor on Amchitka Island, 

Alaska, and was exposed to ionizing radiation in the performance of duty related to the 

Long Shot, Milrow, or Cannikin underground nuclear tests.”

A review of available literature indicates that the first test, Long Shot, an 80 kiloton 

underground nuclear explosion detonated on October 29, 1965, leaked radioactivity into 

the atmosphere. Discharges of gaseous radioactivity from Long Shot were detected 

beginning with traces of radioiodine a month after the explosion. This initial detection 

was followed by krypton-85 in soil gas and tritiated surface water near surface ground 

zero of the Long Shot test a few months after the explosion (page 45 of “Physical and 

Biological Effects, Cannikin,” Atomic Energy Commission, NVO-123, 1973). Another 

study also indicated that there was some seepage of radioactivity near the surface at 

ground zero following the Long Shot test (page 13 of a GAO report, “Nuclear Health and 

Safety, Sites Used for Disposal of Radioactive Waste in Alaska,” GAO/RCED-94-130FS, 

July 1994).

Radioactive contamination on Amchitka Island occurred as a result of activities related to 

the preparation for the three underground nuclear tests and releases from Long Shot and 

Cannikin. This fact is documented in a number of reports, including DOE’s “Linking 

Legacies,” DOE/EM-0319, dated January 1997. Tables 4-4 and C-1, on pages 79 and 

207, respectively, list Amchitka Island as a DOE Environmental Management site with 

thousands of cubic meters of contaminated soil resulting from nuclear testing.
2

Based on the above information, it is my professional opinion that radioactivity from the 

Long Shot underground nuclear test was released to the atmosphere a month after the 

detonation on October 29, 1965. As a result of these airborne radioactive releases, SEC 

members who worked on Amchitka Island, per the definition in EEOICPA, Section 

3621(14)(B), could have been exposed to ionizing radiation from the Long Shot 

underground nuclear test beginning a month after the detonation, i.e., the exposure period 

could be from approximately December 1, 1965 through January 1, 1974 (the end date 

specified in EEOICPA, Section 3621(14)(B)).
Exhibit 32.2


            Section 1350 Certification of Principal Financial Officer


The undersigned, Executive Vice President, Finance and Secretary, of Jaco
Electronics, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to the best of my knowledge, that: (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
of the Company for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2003 (the "Quarterly
Report") accompanying this certification 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company as of the dates and for the periods presented as required by such
report. The foregoing certification is based upon, among other things, my
responsibilities as principal financial officer of the Company, my own due
diligence and representations made by certain other members of the Company's
senior management.


Date:  February 17, 2004

                            /s/ Jeffrey D. Gash
                            ------------------------------------------------
                            Jeffrey D. Gash
                            Executive Vice President, Finance and Secretary
                            (Principal Financial Officer)
Exhibit 99.1



CERTIFICATION



The undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:



(1)

The accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended October 1, 2006 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 accompanying Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date:  January 26, 2007

/s/ Kenneth W. Brimmer



Chief Executive Officer





Date:  January 26, 2007

/s/ Mark Buckrey



Chief Financial Officer
Case 1:07-cv-03287-RJH Document 7 Filed 11/13/2007 Page 1 of 1
EX-10.11




 Exhibit 10.11 

 
 



 
 October 12, 2021 
 Bob
Mahoney 
 Bob – 
 It is with pleasure that I can
communicate the following promotion details with you: 
  

	 	•	 	 Promotion to CSO effective October 1, 2021 



 

	 	•	 	 Base salary: $240k 


  

	 	•	 	 Bonus potential: $60k (25% of base) with eligibility starting at the YE2021 review cycle 



 

	 	•	 	 Additional 20,000 shares (stock options) granted 



Sincerely, 
  

	
	/s/ Jeff Hackman
	Jeff Hackman
	CEO
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 215 (Tuesday, November 8, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67782-67783]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22282]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (Including the 
States of Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee, and 
Wisconsin)

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be 
conducted (via teleconference). The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is 
soliciting public comment, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer 
service at the Internal Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, November 22, 2005, at 11 a.m., 
eastern time.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Ann Delzer at 1-888-912-1227, or 
(414) 297-1604.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that a meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held 
Tuesday, November 22, 2005, at 11 a.m., eastern time via a telephone 
conference call. You can submit written comments to

[[Page 67783]]

the panel by faxing the comments to (414) 297-1623, or by mail to 
Taxpayer Advocacy Panel, Stop 1006MIL, 310 West Wisconsin Avenue, 
Milwaukee, WI 53203-2221, or you can contact us at http://www.improveirs.org. This meeting is not required to be open to the 
public, but because we are always interested in community input, we 
will accept public comments. Please contact Mary Ann Delzer at 1-888-
912-1227 or (414) 297-1604 for dial-in information.
    The agenda will include the following: Various IRS issues.

    Dated: November 1, 2005.
Martha Curry,
Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 05-22282 Filed 11-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-M
#### W. R. RAY, Employee v. CITY OF RALEIGH FIRE DEPARTMENT, Self-Insurer, Employer.

(Filed 17 April 1963.)

Appeal by defendant from *Copeland, Special Judge,*November Assigned Non-Jury Civil Term 1962 of Wake.

Proceeding under Workmen’s Compensation Act.

The Hearing Commissioner, based on findings of fact and conclusions of law, made an award providing that defendant “pay all *292medical bills incurred as a result of” plaintiff's injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment by defendant. The Full Commission adopted the Hearing Commissioner’s findings of fact and conclusions of law and affirmed the award.

The judgment entered in superior court contains no reference to any of defendant’s exceptions ¡to findings of fact and conclusions of law made by the Hearing Commissioner and .adopted by the Full Commission. It recites the matter was heard “on the record on appeal from the Industrial Commission” and adjudges “that the opinion and award of the Industrial Commission in this case be and the same is in all respects sustained.” Defendant excepted “(t)o the foregoing judgment” and appealed. The only assignment of error is in these words: “The appellant assigns as error the judgment of Judge Copeland for that the same is unsupported by the facts or the law.”

*Paul F. Smith for defendant appellant.*

*No counsel contra.*

Per Curiam.

Defendant’s assignment of error does not present the legal question discussed in defendant’s brief. *Rader v. Coach Co.,*225 N.C. 537, 35 S.E. 2d 609; *Glace v. Throwing Co.,*239 N.C. 668, 80 S.E. 2d 759. Even so, it seems appropriate to say that, according to un-contradicted evidence, plaintiff was entitled to the award. The evidence indicates the award involves a doctor’s bill of one hundred dollars and ■a hospital bill of one hundred dollars.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,864
<OTHER-SE>                                    (10,864)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               102,050
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                102,050
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            102,050
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   102,050
<EPS-BASIC>                                     .001
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .001



</TABLE>
#### Phyllis E. TOSTON, Appellant, v. MISSOURI DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, Appellee.

No. 04-1737.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 4, 2005.

Decided Feb. 7, 2005.

Phyllis E. Toston, pro se.

Maureen C. Beekley, Attorney General’s Office, St. Louis, MO, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before BYE, RILEY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Phyllis Toston appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary *83judgment in this Title VII action Toston brought against her former employer, the Missouri Division of Employment Security. Following careful review, we agree with the district court that Toston presented nothing in support of her bare allegation that her employer’s legitimate reason for terminating her—poor performance—was a pretext for race discrimination, *see Riggs v. Kansas City Mo. Pub. Sch. Dist.,*385 F.3d 1164, 1166 (8th Cir.2004), or retaliation, *see Griffith v. City of Des Moines,*387 F.3d 733, 738 (8th Cir.2004). In addition, to the extent she pleaded a hostile-work-environment claim, Toston failed to show harassment pervasive or severe enough to affect a term, condition, or privilege of her employment. *See id.*at 739. Accordingly, we affirm. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Henry E. Autrey, United States District Judge for the Eastern District *83of Missouri.
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.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice 5171] 

# SUMMARY:

                        The International Telecommunication Advisory Committee announces meetings in preparation for the December meeting of the International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication Development Advisory Group (TDAG) and December meetings of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development/Committee for Information, Computer and Communications Policy (OECD/ICCP) Working Party on Telecommunications and Information Services Policies (TISP) and Working Party on the Information Economy (WPIE). Members of the public will be admitted to the extent that seating is available, and may join in the discussions, subject to the instructions of the Chair. Directions to the meeting location are available to the public on the Internet and conference bridge information may be obtained from                         *minardje@state.gov.*                         End Summary.                     

The International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet at the U.S. Department of State, Harry S. Truman Building Room 2533A to prepare for meetings of the OECD/ICCP Working Parties ITU-D Telecommunication Development Advisory Group (TDAG), on Wednesday, November 16, and Wednesday, November 30, 2005, all meetings 2-3 p.m. The International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet at the U.S. Department of State, Harry S. Truman Building Room 2533A to prepare for meetings of the ITU-D Telecommunication Development Advisory Group (TDAG), on Thursday, November 3, Thursday, November 10, and Thursday, November 17, 2005, all meetings 10 a.m.—noon. 

Dated: October 19, 2005. 

Marian Gordon, 

Director, Telecommunication & Information Standardization, International Communications & Information Policy, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 05-21376 Filed 10-25-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710-07-P