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

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                            1813
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      14673
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                            3619
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                              3587
<LOANS>                                          11717
<ALLOWANCE>                                        159
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   33182
<DEPOSITS>                                       29861
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                615
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           281
<OTHER-SE>                                        2425
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                   33182
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                    833
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  827
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    74
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                  1722
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 768
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 773
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                              949
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   3
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    848
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    332
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         332
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       224
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     8.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     8.03
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    .031
<LOANS-NON>                                        233
<LOANS-PAST>                                        89
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   161
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        6
<RECOVERIES>                                         4
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  159
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               159
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine Special Emphasis Panel; Loan Repayment Program.                    

*Date:*                         May 17, 2010.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Peter Kozel, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, NCCAM, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 401, Bethesda, MD 20892–5475, 301–496–8004,                         *kozelp@mail.nih.gov.*

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to meeting due to scheduling conflicts.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.213, Research and Training in Complementary and Alternative Medicine, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

      ( print page 26261)    
Dated: May 4, 2010.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010–11050 Filed 5–10–10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION



I, Vernon H. Foersterling, Jr., certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Integrated Security Systems, Inc.;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:



(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting;



5.

I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.



Date:  May 22, 2008

/s/ VERNON H. FOERSTERLING, JR.

Vernon H. Foersterling, Jr.,

President and Chief Executive Officer

Principal Executive and Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.8
 Contract for Professional Services between Minera Metalin S.A. of C.V. from now on designated in
this document as the Company, and Lics. Armando Lopez and Maria Antonieta Garza, from now on
designated in this document as the solicitors, for their representation of the Company in
litigation interposed against them by Sociedad Cooperativa de Explotación Minera Mineros Norteños
S.C.L. entered into the 15 of October of 2008, under the following terms
    
   Minera Metalin S.A. of C.V.
    
    Lic Ma Antonieta GarzaRoger KolvoordLegal representative
    
    Lic Armando Lopez
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION www.edgaradvantage.com




QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

Exhibit 10q-10  


 
 

AMENDMENT TO THE BELLSOUTH PERSONAL
  RETIREMENT ACCOUNT PENSION PLAN    
  


    WHEREAS, BellSouth Corporation (the "Company") sponsors the BellSouth Personal Retirement Account Pension Plan (the "Plan"), which was amended and restated
effective January 1, 1998, and subsequently amended from time to time; and 


    WHEREAS,
the Executive Nominating Compensation and Human Resources Committee (the "Committee") of the Board of Directors of BellSouth Corporation, at its February 28, 2000
meeting, adopted a resolution to amend the Plan to provide an additional credit for the 2000 Plan Year equal to 1% of each Plan participant's 2000 compensation; and 


    WHEREAS,
the Committee authorized appropriate officers of the Company to do such further acts and to execute such documents as may be necessary or advisable to effectuate the purposes
of such resolution; and 


    WHEREAS,
the Company now desires to revise the Plan document to reflect such amendment; 


    NOW,
THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority delegated by the Committee as referred to above, the undersigned officer approves the following to reflect such amendment of the Plan: 


 
 

1.    



    Amend
Section 3 of the Plan by adding the following sentence at the end of Subparagraph 3.05(a): 




"The
Board has approved an additional credit for the 2000 Plan Year equal to the Participant's Compensation multiplied by one percent, and this additional credit shall be credited to each
Participant's account as of the last day of such Plan Year." 




 
 

2.    



    Any
other provisions of the Plan not amended herein shall remain in full force and effect. 


    This
Amendment shall be effective as of January 1, 2000. 














By: /s/ RICHARD D. SIBBERNSEN  

   





    Richard
D. Sibbernsen

Vice President—Human Resources 


Date:
December 15, 2000 













































QuickLinks


AMENDMENT TO THE BELLSOUTH PERSONAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNT PENSION PLAN

1.

2.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*Anna Rotunno, Appellant.

Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Appellate Part, First Department,

October 14, 1936.

*Roe S. Oiardelli,*for the appellant.

*William C. Dodge, District Attorney of New York County [Edwin J. Talley*of counsel], for the respondent.

Kernochan, P. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the City Magistrates’ Court convicting the appellant of disorderly conduct.

It appears that on May 31, 1935, at nine p. m., the City College had donated a room to an organization of midwives for the purpose of instructing them on the new rules of relief to maternity workers. *697This was one of a series of meetings, and it appears that the appellant had not been in sympathy with the complainant who had arranged for these meetings.

The evidence in the case is conflicting, for the appellant contradicts everything that the People’s witnesses testified to. The appellant was the only witness called by the defense, and the magistrate was justified in resolving the facts against her.

It is amply established by the testimony that the appellant circulated a slip of paper at and before the meeting calling the complainant a demented creature, an imposter, a quack, a hypocrite, a traitor and a snake; also a rat, a stool pigeon, .a racketeer and a parasite. Not content with this vituperation, she shouted these epithets in the meeting itself, throwing it into great confusion, and was finally led out by a police officer at the request of complainant.

One may easily infer from the testimony that the appellant went to the meeting for the express purpose of causing a disturbance, and the magistrate was fully justified in rendering a judgment of conviction. The suspension of sentence following the conviction was lenient in the extreme, and a much more severe sentence would be sustained by this court. It is common knowledge that individuals and groups of people frequently attend gatherings simply for the purpose of making a disturbance, in order to attract attention to themselves or some principle that they advocate; such offenders, when convicted, should be given severe sentences as a deterrent to others. In this case it is impossible to agree with the contention of the appellant that she only conducted herself in a way that she had a right to do, as an interested member of a meeting called for a specific purpose.

Judgment affirmed.

All concur. Present — Kernochan, P. J., Solomon and Voor-HEES, J J.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6323

RAYFORD KNIGHT,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-98-

2530-L)

Submitted: May 25, 2000 Decided: June 6, 2000

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rayford Knight, Appellant Pro Se. John Francis Purcell, Jr., OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Rayford Knight appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his motion for return of property. We dismiss the appeal

for lack of jurisdiction. Knight did not sign his notice of

appeal. Instead, another inmate signed it. The notice of appeal

signed by someone other than Knight did not confer jurisdiction on

this court. See Covington v. Allsbrook, 636 F.2d 63 (4th Cir.

1980). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.9


Chequemate International Inc                                      August 8, 2000
330 Washington Ste. 330
Marina Del Rey, Ca. 90292

Attn:    J. Michael Heil CEO
         cc.  Alan Hunter and Paul LaBarre


This letter is to confirm our phone conversation today between Paul LaBarre and
myself. We have agreed on the following in order to close the purchase of the
United Business Services ("UBS") assets by Chequemate ("C-3D"). The parties
agreed to the following amendments.

         i.       The remaining purchase price of the assets is $940,000.

         ii.      Chequemate will immediately deliver to the UBS a certificate
                  for 200,000 restricted shares and immediately file a
                  registration statement (S-3) with respect to those shares.
                  Chequemate will complete this registration no later than 45
                  days after receipt of shares.

         iii.     In addition, Chequemate will immediately deliver 440,000
                  restricted C-3D shares (144 stock). The holding period for
                  these shares will begin on the date of April 14, 2000
                  Chequemate will also deliver to UBS a letter from C-3D's
                  Securities attorney opinion letter to on or before April 14,
                  2001 for the removal of the 144 restrictions.

b. Chequemate at its option may repurchase any of the 144 stock from UBS at a
rate of $l.50 per share up and until April 14, 2001.



Signed:                                      Signed:



/s/ T. McDermott                              /s/ J. Michael Heil
---------------------------------            ----------------------------
T. McDermott                                  J. Michael Heil
President United Business Services            CEO Chequemate International Inc
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 175 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 175

 To repeal the habeas corpus requirement that a Federal court defer to 
State court judgments and uphold a conviction regardless of whether the 
  Federal court believes that the State court erroneously interpreted 
 constitutional law, except in cases where the Federal court believes 
            the State court acted in an unreasonable manner.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            Janaury 19, 1999

 Mr. Moynihan introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To repeal the habeas corpus requirement that a Federal court defer to 
State court judgments and uphold a conviction regardless of whether the 
  Federal court believes that the State court erroneously interpreted 
 constitutional law, except in cases where the Federal court believes 
            the State court acted in an unreasonable manner.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF THE REQUIREMENT THAT A FEDERAL COURT DEFER TO A 
              STATE COURT UNLESS THE STATE COURT ACTED IN AN 
              UNREASONABLE MANNER IN HABEAS CORPUS CASES.

    (a) Repeal.--Subsection (d) of section 2254 of title 28, United 
States Code, is repealed.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2264(b) of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended by striking ``, (d),''.
                                 <all>
```
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 Annual Report of Radiologix, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KA for the year ended December 31, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stephen D. Linehan, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge that:



(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 the Company.



|                                      |  |  |  | 
|------------------------------------- |  |  |  | 
|/s/  Stephen D. Linehan               |  |  |  | 
|Stephen D. Linehan                    |  |  |  | 
|President and Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | 



Dated: March 16, 2004



A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to Radiologix, Inc. and will be retained by Radiologix, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane lunani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T PED RO A LO N SO G O N ZA LES, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. R O B E R T A Y E R S , W ar den, offi ci al cap aci ty, D e f

e n d an t, and S C H U T Z E R , P H D S urgeon , offi ci al c ap a c ity ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 12- 55118 D . C. N o . 2 : 1 0 - c v - 0 2 9 0 3 - D SF- SP ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea lfr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia D a l e S . F i s c he r , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d F e bruary11, 2013 ** 

# FI LED FEB 14 2 013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS12- 55118 2 B efo re: F E RN A N D E Z , T A S H IM A , an dW A R D L A W , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P e dr o A l ons o G onz a l e s , aC a l i f orni as t a t e pr i s one r , appe a l s pr o s e f r om the d is tr ic t c o u rt’s ju d g m e n t in h is 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 a c tio n a lle g in g th a t d e f e n d an ts w e r e de l i be r a t e l yi ndi f

f e r e ntt o hi s s e r i ous m e di c a lne e ds . W e have j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291. W e r e vi e w de novo adi s tr i c tc ourt ’ s di s m i s s a lunde r28 U .S .C . § § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) an d1 9 1 5 A , R es ni ck v. H ayes , 21 3 F . 3d44 3, 44 7 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 0 ) ; B arr e n v . H

arr i ngton , 1 5 2 F . 3 d1 1 9 3 , 1 1 9 4 ( 9 th C i r . 1 9 9 8 ) ( o r d e r ) , an dwe a f f i rm. T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y di sm i ss ed G on za l es ’ ac t i on because G on za l es fa i l ed t o sho w i n h i s s ec on d am ended com pl ai ntand i t s att ac hm ent s that d e f e n d an ts a c te dw ith d e lib e r a te in d if f e r e n c e to h is s e r io u s m e d ic a l n e e d s . See T oguc hiv . Chung , 3 9 1 F .3 d1 0 5 1 , 1 0 6 0 - 6 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) ( “D e lib e r a te i ndi f f e r e nc e i s ahi gh l e ga ls t andar d. A s how i ng of m e di c a lm a lpr a c t i c e or n e g lig e n c e is in s u f

f ic ie n t to e s tab lis h ac o n s titu tio n a l d e p r iv a tio n u n d e rth e E ig h th A m e n d m e n t.” ) ; see a l

so W i lhe m v . R otm an , 680 F . 3d 1113, 1122 ( 9th C i r . 2012) (di ff er ence of op i ni on as t o w hi ch m edi ca lcourse of ac t i on shou l d b e pursued do es no tgi ve ri se t o a del i berat e i nd i ff er ence cl ai m ). A FFI R M ED .
<PAGE>

                                                              Exhibit 10 (b) (1)

                               AMENDMENTS TO THE
                          ALCOA EXCESS BENEFITS PLAN A

Pursuant to Article 5 of the Plan, the Plan is amended as follows:

1.   Section 2.3 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

          No benefit under this Excess Plan may be assigned, transferred,
          pledged or encumbered or be subject in any manner to alienation or
          anticipation, except that any exceptions to the non-alienation
          provisions in Plan I, shall also apply to benefits hereunder.

2.  In all other respects the Plan is hereby ratified and confirmed.