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


<ARTICLE>                                            9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         33,255
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    1,057,206
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         284,752
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           281,073
<LOANS>                                        983,193
<ALLOWANCE>                                    9,120
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,451,773
<DEPOSITS>                                     1,549,419
<SHORT-TERM>                                   652,434
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            28,253
<LONG-TERM>                                    50,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       121,145
<OTHER-SE>                                     50,522
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 2,451,773
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                77,804
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              89,222
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               284
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               167,310
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             61,972
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             98,006
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          69,304
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  650
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             119
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                40,963
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                36,091
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     36,091
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   20,151
<EPS-BASIC>                                  2.38
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  2.26
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                 7.13
<LOANS-NON>                                    6,303
<LOANS-PAST>                                   255
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               8,941
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  513
<RECOVERIES>                                   42
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              9,120
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           9,120
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                            0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        8,014



</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1
                                                                    ------------


                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Levcor
         International, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended
         September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
         on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert A. Levinson, Chief
         Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to section 906 of
         the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (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.


Dated: November 14, 2003

By: /s/ ROBERT A. LEVINSON
    -----------------------
    Robert A. Levinson
    Chief Executive Officer


                                     Page 30
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Christian IZQUIERDO, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 02-50172.

D.C. No. CR-01-00128-RSWL-01.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted March 5, 2003.

Decided March 17, 2003.

*217Before LAY,* HAWKINS and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

*

 Honorable Donald P. Lay, Senior United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation.

ORDER **

Appellant-defendant Christian Izquierdo unconditionally pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B), thereby waiving his right to challenge on appeal the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence. Fed. R.Crim. Pro. 11(a)(2); *see also United States v. Floyd,*108 F.3d 202, 203 (9th Cir.1997). At the plea colloquy, however, the district court advised Izquierdo that he could appeal the court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence. Because the district court misinformed Izquierdo of his appellate rights, Izquierdo’s plea was not knowingly and voluntarily made since Izquierdo may have believed that he could still appeal the adverse ruling on his motion to suppress evidence. *See United States v. Cortez,*973 F.2d 764, 767-69 (9th Cir.1992). We therefore order Izquierdo’s conviction and sentence vacated and the matter remanded for further proceedings.

VACATED and REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
* Pursuant to 5 T H C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED
April 3, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-30862 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LIONEL BICKHAM,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 02-CR-15-ALL-J

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Lionel Bickham appeals his sentence following his conviction

by a jury for being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation

of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). Bickham argues that the

district court erred in incre asing his offense level pursuant to

Sentencing Guidelines § 2K2.1(b)(5), which provide s for a fourlevel increase “[i]f the defendant used or possessed any firearm or

ammunition in connection with another felony offense.” Bickham1 See United States v. Armstead , 114 F.3d 504, 511-12 (5th

Cir. 1997); United States v. Condren , 18 F.3d 1190, 1199-1200 (5th Cir. 1994).

2 admits that the crack cocaine found in his possession was for his

personal use. The firearm, which was present in the vehicle at the

time of his arrest, could have been used to facilitate his drugrelated activities. 1 The district court did not err in applying

the adjustment to Bickham’s offense level because the firearm was

possessed in connection with Bickham’s drug possession within the

meaning of Sentencing Guidelines § 2K2.1(b)(5).

AFFIRMED.
**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS**In connection with the Quarterly Report of Bancorp of New Jersey, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securitiesand Exchange Act of 1934; and2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                           /s/ Albert F. Buzzetti   Albert F. Buzzetti   President and Chief Executive Officer                                                        /s/ Michael Lesler   Michael Lesler   Executive Vice Presidentand Chief Financial Officer  August 14, 2007
33
Exhibit 10.15


 


Supplemental Lease Contract of Guanyun Zhuang


(English Translation)


 


Party A (Lessor): Fujian Focus Media
Co., Ltd.


 


Party B(Lessee): Pingtan Comprehensive
Experimental Area E Home Service Co., Ltd.


 


Unless otherwise stated,
all terms in this contract have the same definitions as in the lease contract signed by the two parties on December 22, 2017 (hereinafter
referred to as the “original contract”).


 


Based on the principle
of mutual benefit and reciprocity, the two parties, after friendly negotiation and based on actual conditions, changed part of
the contract terms based on the original contract, and concluded the following supplementary contract:


 


		1.	The lease period of the 7 holiday villas leased in the original contract is from January 1, 2018 to
December 31, 2022. The rent is RMB 175,000 per month and RMB 2.1 million per year. RMB 10.5 million has been paid by Party B. Four
villas are now returned to Party A, and the deadline for their lease is March 31, 2019. Party A is required to return the overpaid
RMB 4.5 million to Party B. Party A is responsible for the construction of a number of holiday recreational villas in the flat
area of the scenic area according to the planning requirements. When those villas completed and ready for use, Party B has the
priority to lease for recreational use at the original agreed price.



		2.	The 20-year usage fee of Shoushan Waterfall Scenic Area is RMB 15 million and the performance bond
is RMB 2.5 million as set in the original contract. Party B still enjoys the right to use Shoushan Waterfall Scenic Area.



 


After this contract takes
effect, it will become an integral part of the original contract and has the same legal effect as the original contract. Except
for the terms explicitly modified in this contract, the rest of the original contract shall continue to be valid. In the event
of conflict between this contract and the original contract, this contract shall prevail.


 


This agreement is in duplicate.
Party A holds one and Party B holds one. They have the same legal effect and will take effect from the date of signing and sealing
by both parties.


 


	
        Party A (official seal):

        Fujian Focus Media Co., Ltd. (Seal)
	
        Party B (official seal):

        Pingtan Comprehensive Experimental

 Area E
        Home Service Co., Ltd. (Seal)



 


Date: 3/12/2019
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6697
ORANIE GALINDO FORBES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DAN L. DOVE, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (CA-01-30-7-24BG) Submitted: August 15, 2002 Decided: August 20, 2002 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Oranie Galindo Forbes, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Oranie Galindo Forbes appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Forbes v. Dove , CA-01-30-7-24BG (D.S.C. Apr. 11, 2002). 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
No. 77-6154.

#### Broomfield *v.*Wainwright, Secretary, Department of Offender Rehabilitation of Florida.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
                                       
                         Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following registration 
statements of NeXstar Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and in the related prospectuses 
of our report dated March 1, 1999, with respect to the consolidated 
financial statements and schedule of NeXstar Pharmaceuticals, Inc. included 
in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1998:

1. Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-80938) pertaining to the 
   NeXagen, Inc. 1993 Incentive Stock Plan.

2. Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-97206) pertaining to the 
   NeXagen, Inc. 1993 Incentive Stock Plan.

3. Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-34515) pertaining to the 
   NeXagen, Inc. 1993 Incentive Stock Plan.

4. Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-88074) pertaining to the 
   NeXstar Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 1994 Stock Purchase Plan.

5. Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-07887) pertaining to the 
   NeXstar Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 1994 Stock Purchase Plan.

6. Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-07889) pertaining to the 
   NeXstar Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 1995 Director Option Plan.

7. Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-90994) pertaining to the 
   Vestar, Inc. 1988 Stock Option Plan and the Vestar, Inc. 1992 Deferred 
   Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors. 

8. Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-00758) of NeXstar 
   Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and in the related Prospectus.

9. Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-35827) of NeXstar 
   Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and in the related Prospectus.

                                             /s/  ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Denver, Colorado
March 17, 1999
## S IXTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 6D2023-1466 Lower Tribunal No. 2021-CF-015601-A-OR

_____________________________

D AMIAN A NDRE C LARKE , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________ Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County. Renee A. Roche, Judge.

August 27, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

STARGEL and SMITH, JJ., and LAMBER T, B.D., Associate Judge, concur.

Howard L. “Rex” Dimmig, II, Public Defende r, and Ali L. Hansen, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney Genera l, Tallahassee, and Richard A. Pallas, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
Exhibit 21.1

TRISM, INC.

Subsidiaries of TRISM, Inc.



|                                                                    |           
|------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------
|Trism Secured Transportation, Inc.                                  | Delaware  
|Tri-State Motor Transit Co.                                         | Delaware  
|Aero Body and Truck Equipment Company, Inc.,                        | Delaware  
|Diablo Systems Incorporated 
     d/b/a/ Diablo Transportation, Inc | California
|.                                                                   |           
|Trism Eastern, Inc. 
     d/b/a/ C.I. Whitten Transfer              | Delaware  
|                                                                    |           
|Trism Heavy Haul, Inc.                                              | Delaware  
|Trism Specialized Carriers, Inc.                                    | Georgia   
|Trism Special Services, Inc.                                        | Georgia   
|                                                                    |           
|E.L. Powell & Sons Trucking Co., Inc.                               | Oklahoma  
|Trism Transport, Inc.                                               | Delaware  
|Trism Transport Services, Inc.                                      | Utah      
|TRISM Logistics, Inc.                                               | New Jersey
|Trism Equipment, Inc.                                               | Delaware  
|                                                                    |
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


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 amended Quarterly Report of Midas Medici Group Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Nana Baffour, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(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.







Date: November 15, 2010
By:
/s/ Nana BaffourNana Baffour

Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
#### COMEAUX v. SOUTHCOAST CORPORATION.

No. 16667.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Oct. 4, 1937.

For original opinion, see 175 So. 177.

PER CURIAM.

In an application for rehearing plaintiff suggests that, even if we adhere to the view that there is no liability ex delicto, we should nevertheless render judgment in compensation in favor of plaintiff since, although there is no alternative prayer for *143such relief in the petition, the record contains proof — so plaintiff states — which warrants such recovery, and since there is in the petition a prayer “for all general and equitable relief.”

A further examination of the record convinces us that there is not contained therein proof sufficient to warrant a recovery in compensation, but we believe that the compensation laws of this state, Act No. 20 of 1914, as amended, do vest in us discretion to remand a case in such situation to the end that plaintiff inay be given opportunity to amend, if the facts justify. We did this in Crews v. Levitan Smart Shops, 171 So. 608, 611, in a situation which we believe identical with that now under consideration and in which we said: “We have concluded to remand the case to •permit amendment of the pleadings and proof appropriate to an action in compensation.”

For the reasons assigned, our original decree is amended to the extent that this matter is remanded to the civil district court for the parish of Orleans for further proceedings according to law and not inconsistent with the views herein expressed. To defendant-appellant there is reserved the right to apply for rehearing. Costs of appeal to be borne by plaintiff; other costs to await final decree.

Original decree amended; case remanded.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 155 (Monday, August 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 46648]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18417]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Office of Justice Programs

[OJP (NIJ) Docket No. 1486]


Proposed Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) 
Protective Ensemble Standards for Law Enforcement and CBRN Protective 
Ensemble Certification Program Requirements

AGENCY: National Institute of Justice.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and 
Nuclear (CBRN) Protective Ensemble Standards for Law Enforcement and 
CBRN Protective Ensemble Certification Program Requirements.

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

SUMMARY: In an effort to obtain comments from interested parties, the 
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National 
Institute of Justice will make available to the general public two 
draft documents: (1) A draft standard entitled, ``CBRN Protective 
Ensemble Standard for Law Enforcement'' and (2) a draft companion 
document entitled, ``NIJ CBRN Protective Ensemble Certification Program 
Requirements''.
    The opportunity to provide comments on these two documents is open 
to industry technical representatives, public safety agencies and 
organizations, research, development and scientific communities, and 
all other stakeholders and interested parties.
    Those individuals wishing to provide comments on the draft 
documents under consideration are directed to the following Web site: 
http://www.justnet.org.

DATES: The comment period will be open for 45 days beginning on August 
11, 2008 and concluding on September 24, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Casandra Robinson, by telephone at 
202-305-2596 [Note: this is not a toll-free telephone number], or by e-
mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4b282a382a252f392a6539242922253824250b3e382f2421652c243d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="781b190b19161c0a19560a171a11160b1716380d0b1c1712561f170e">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: August 5, 2008.
David W. Hagy,
Director, National Institute of Justice.
 [FR Doc. E8-18417 Filed 8-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-18-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Gerardo TERAN-CORTEZ, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 02-50231.

D.C. No. CR-01-01022-MLH.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 19, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

*932MEMORANDUM **

Gerardo Teran-Cortez appeals his conviction pursuant to a conditional guilty plea and his 16-month sentence for importing cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960 when he attempted to smuggle 23.28 kilograms of cocaine through the Calexico Port of Entry.

His contention that 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960 are facially unconstitutional is foreclosed by *United States v. Mendoza-Paz,*286 F.3d 1104,1109-10 (9th Cir.2002), and *United States v. Buckland,*289 F.3d 558 (9th Cir.) (en banc), *cert. denied,*535 U.S. 1105, 122 S.Ct. 2314, 152 L.Ed.2d 1067 (2002). Teran-Cortez’s contention that *Harris v. United States,*536 U.S. 545, 122 S.Ct. 2406, 153 L.Ed.2d 524 (2002), overrules *United States v. Buckland*and *United States v. Mendozcir-Paz*is foreclosed by *United States v. Hernandez,*314 F.3d 430, *as amended,*322 F.3d 592, 2003 WL 730663 (9th Cir. Mar.5, 2003). His contention that the indictment should be dismissed because it did not allege *mens rea*as to drug type and quantity is foreclosed by *United States v. Carranza,*289 F.3d 634 (9th Cir.2002).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.