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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                      18,093,685
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 61,147,174
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      60,957,141
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        60,932,276
<LOANS>                                    335,019,140
<ALLOWANCE>                                  3,874,688
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             493,654,361
<DEPOSITS>                                 409,021,195
<SHORT-TERM>                                36,692,999
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          2,590,480
<LONG-TERM>                                  1,195,569
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    44,126,708
<OTHER-SE>                                      27,410
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             493,654,361
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             31,736,094
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            4,805,922
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            36,542,016
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          11,677,836
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          13,141,505
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                       23,400,511
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                2,322,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             19,673,811
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              6,457,740
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   4,212,384
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,212,384
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.28
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.12
<LOANS-NON>                                  6,566,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                    79,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                              3,289,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             3,280,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                1,921,000
<RECOVERIES>                                   194,000
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            3,875,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         3,875,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
32.1


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002











In
connection with the Annual Report of GeoGlobal Resources Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jean Paul Roy, 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 results of operations of the Company
      for the periods presented.

















/s/
Jean Paul Roy


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


Jean Paul
Roy


President
and Chief Executive Officer


March 31,
2010
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

March 15, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6624

Alps Electric (North America), Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT JOHN A. GUIDIC E, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. JAM ES L. PR IEST; INDYNE, INC ., nam e d a s Indy n e /W R OIC , De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 13-56240 D.C . No. 2:13-c v-01856-M W FJEM M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia M ic h a e l W . Fitz ge ra ld, Distric t Judge , Pre siding

Subm itte d

M ay 13, 2015 ** B e fore : LEAVY, C ALLAHAN, a nd M . SM ITH, C i rc uit Judge s. John A. Guidic e a

ppe a ls pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt dismissing his de fa m a t ion a c t ion a

rising from e ve nts tha

t oc c urre d on Va

nde nbe rg Air Forc e B a se . W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie w de novo a

# F IL ED MAY19 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).dism issa l for fa ilure to sta t e a c la im , Pride

v . C orre a , 719 F.3d 1130, 1133 (9th C ir. 2013), a

nd we a ffirm . The distric t c ourt prope rly dism isse d Guidic e ’ s de fam a tion c la im be c a use Prie st’ s sta

te m e n t tha

t Guidic e shoute d is not a c tiona ble . Se e Taus v . Loftus , 151 P.3d 1185, 1209 (C a l . 2007) (se tting forth e le m e n ts of a de fam a tion c la im and e xpla ining tha

t a n e xpre s sion of opinion c annot form the ba sis of a

de fam at ion a c tion); Grillo v . Smith , 193 C a l. R ptr. 414, 417 (C t. App. 1983) (“ The words

‘ a ngry ,’ ‘ shoute d,’ [and] ‘ storm e d,’ . . . fa ll c l e arly on the opinion side

of the line . The y are subje c tive words . . . of thesort whic h ha ve be e n found to beopinion a s a m a tte r of la

w fre que ntly

in the pa st.” ). AFFIRM E D.

1 3 - 5 6 2 4 0 2
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Eric VONGRUBEN, Defendant-Appellant. Eric VONGRUBEN, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. 56312, 56335 and 60919.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.

Dec. 29, 1992.

Brad B. Baker, Columbia, for defendant-appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Rudolph R. Rhodes, IV, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for plaintiff-respondent.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, found guilty of first degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without eligibility for parole or probation, claims the trial court erred. Appellant also appeals from a denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. Judgment affirmed pursuant to Rules 30.25 and 84.16(b).
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-1729
ROBERT G. BREMNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendants - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert R. Merhige, Jr., Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judges. (MISC-97-4-3) Submitted: August 28, 1997 Decided: September 12, 1997 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert G. Bremner, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Edward Brookhart, Sara Ann Ketchum, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his Petition to Quash Internal Revenue Service Third Party Summons. Our review of the record discloses that the Government met its burden of proof under 26 U.S.C. § 7602 (1994) to support the enforcement of the summons. See United States v. Powell , 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964); Alphin v. United States , 809 F.2d 236, 238 (4th Cir. 1987).Moreover, we find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Appellant's motion filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 52, 59. Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 31.2

RULE 13a-14(a) CERTIFICATION

OF THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Judd P. Tirnauer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Destination Maternity Corporation; and

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.

Date: January 11, 2011



|                                                                                              
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/S/  JUDD P. TIRNAUER                                                                         
|Judd P. Tirnauer
Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
EXHIBIT 31.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
           PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Malek Bohsali, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-KSB for the three months
ended September 30, 2007, of Lucas Energy, 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 registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The Registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:

     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the Registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our 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 Registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the Registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5. The Registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
Registrant's auditors and the audit committee of Registrant'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 Registrant'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 Registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.


Dated: November 9, 2007                 /s/ MALEK BOHSALI
                                        -----------------------------------
                                        Malek Bohsali
                                        Chief Financial Officer
MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-11-00030-CV

In the MATTER OF J.L.S., A Child

From the County Court, Bandera County, Texas

Trial Court No. 10-0010

Honorable Richard A. Evans, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 21, 2011

REVERSED AND REMANDED

The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (“DFPS”) and Christopher 

McKelvy appeal the trial court’s orders imposing monitoring obligations on them and assessing 

court costs, fees, and restitution against them in a juvenile proceeding.

J.L.S. is a juvenile under the permanent managing conservatorship of DFPS. Christopher 

McKelvy is employed by the Department and is J.L.S.’s substitute care caseworker. The State of 

Texas filed a petition to declare J.L.S. to have engaged in delinquent conduct by committing the 

offense of burglary of a habitation.1 The trial court adjudicated J.L.S. delinquent, conducted a 

disposition hearing, and placed J.L.S. on probation under the supervision of the Bandera County 

 1 J.L.S. was in foster care when the delinquent conduct occurred. At that time, McKelvy had been J.L.S.’s 

caseworker for several months. 
04-11-00030-CV

- 2 -

Juvenile Probation Department. The trial court’s disposition order also ordered McKelvy, as 

J.L.S.’s “guardian,” to pay $2,187.50 in restitution, $20.00 in court costs, $15.00 per month 

probation supervisory fees, and $300.00 in attorney’s fees. In addition, the trial court signed an 

“Order Concerning Guardians of Juvenile,” which orders “Texas Department of Child Protective 

Services, Christopher McKelvy, or his Designee” to ensure J.L.S.’s attendance at school, report 

violations of school rules and probation conditions, ensure compliance with curfews, and to 

perform other monitoring requirements. The trial court denied DFPS’s and McKelvy’s motion to 

modify and for a new trial, and they appealed.

For the reasons stated in this court’s opinion in In the Matter of R.L., No. 04-11-00029-

CV, 2011 WL 4089260 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 14, 2011, no pet. h.), we hold the relief 

the trial court granted against DFPS and McKelvy is barred by sovereign immunity, and the trial 

court lacked jurisdiction to grant the relief. We therefore reverse the trial court’s orders and 

remand the cause to the trial court with instructions to eliminate all provisions in its orders 

imposing obligations on DFPS or McKelvy.

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Richard DETHERAGE, Appellant.

No. 18724.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division One.

Jan. 24, 1994.

Raymond L. Legg, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jennifer A. Glancy, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

MONTGOMERY, Judge.

Following a bench trial on February 18, 1993, Richard Detherage (Defendant) was convicted of possession of a controlled substance, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), § 195.202, RSMo Supp.1993. On April 1, 1993, the trial court sentenced Defendant to a two-year prison term, suspended imposition of that sentence, and placed Defendant on five years of supervised probation. Defendant appeals the conviction. This Court dismisses the appeal.

Defendant’s single point relied on pertains to the trial court’s refusal to suppress the LSD seized from Defendant and evidence of certain statements he made following his arrest. However, a defendant may not appeal from a conviction in which imposition of sentence was suspended, because a suspended imposition of sentence is not a final appeal-able judgment as required by § 547.070, RSMo 1986. *State v. Lynch,*679 S.W.2d 858, 860 (Mo. banc 1984); *State v. Hanners,*827 S.W.2d 273, 274 (Mo.App.1992); *State v. Sandbothe,*750 S.W.2d 664, 665-66 (Mo.App.1988). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.

PARRISH, C.J., and SHRUM, J., concur.
exhibit10-1.htm


Exhibit 10.1

 


AMENDMENT

TO

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT





This Amendment to Employment Agreement (this “Amendment”) is by and between XELR8, Inc. (the “Company”) and John Pougnet (“Employee”), and is executed effective as of May 7, 2010.





RECITALS





WHEREAS, the Company and Employee are parties to that certain Employment Agreement, dated June 1, 2009, by and between the Company and Employee (“Agreement”); and





WHEREAS, the Company and Employee desire to amend the Agreement, to extend the Term of the Agreement under the terms and conditions set forth herein.





AGREEMENT





For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:





1. Term and Termination.  The Term of the Agreement,
as set forth in Section 3 thereof, shall be extended for an additional one year period until June 1, 2011; provided, however, in the event the Company delivers notice to Employee on or before August 31, 2010 (“Early Termination Notice”), the Agreement shall terminate on November 28, 2010 (“Early Termination Date”) (an “Early Termination”); provided, further,  in
the event the Company fails to consummate a financing resulting in gross proceeds to the Company of at least $500,000 on or before the August 31, 2010, the Early Termination Date shall be August 31, 2010, unless such Early Termination is waived by the parties hereto, which waiver shall be in writing.





2. Conflict.  Unless specifically set forth
herein, or the context otherwise requires, each of the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement shall survive execution of this Amendment, and shall continue in full force and effect.  In the event of a conflict in the terms and conditions set forth in this Amendment and the Agreement, the terms and conditions set forth herein shall apply.





EXECUTED this 7th day of May, 2010, to be effective as of the Effective Date.





 


	
EMPLOYEE: 

 

 

 

By: /s/ John D Pougnet             

Name: John Pougnet

Title: Chief Financial Officer 
	
COMPANY:

 

XELR8, INC.

 

By: /s/ Daniel W. Rumsey                    

Name: Daniel W. Rumsey

Title: Interim Chief Executive Officer
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

April 12, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-7153

ECM Industries LLC: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Product_Exclusions

_04.15.19.pdf.

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel