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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         450,000
<SECURITIES>                                 1,561,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,090,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   150,000
<INVENTORY>                                  7,160,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            14,847,000
<PP&E>                                       4,458,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,119,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              19,945,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,872,000
<BONDS>                                      3,981,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       907,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,658,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                19,945,000
<SALES>                                      3,970,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,970,000
<CGS>                                        2,375,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,375,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,227,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              40,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                409,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            409,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   409,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
        

</TABLE>
#### Mervin ARNOLD; et al., Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. CITY OF SCAPPOOSE; et al., Defendants—Appellees.

No. 02-35492.

D.C. No. CV-00-01640-FR.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 19, 2003.

*934Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Mervin and Nellie Arnold appeal pro se the district court’s summary judgment dismissal of their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants committed various constitutional and state law torts when they arrested him, drew his blood for alcohol testing pursuant to a warrant, and provided medical treatment against his wishes. We have jurisdiction' pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, *Gallegos v. City of Los Angeles,*308 F.3d 987, 990 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Arnold’s claims that he was arrested without probable cause and unconstitutionally searched. The evidence submitted showed that police had probable cause to arrest Arnold because they found him collapsed on a laundromat floor, wavering in and out of consciousness, smelling of alcohol, with his van parked haphazardly against the side of a nearby building. *See Mackinney v. Nielsen,*69 F.3d 1002, 1005 (9th Cir.1995). The police properly searched Arnold, his wallet, and his van pursuant to a valid arrest. *See United States v. Passaro,*624 F.2d 938, 943-44 (9th Cir.1980). Further, a judge would likely issue a warrant to test Arnold’s blood on the facts surrounding Arnold’s arrest, even without his alleged admission to police that he drank alcohol. *See Hervey v. Estes,*65 F.3d 784, 789 (9th Cir.1995).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Arnold’s deliberate indifference claim because, even if the examining paramedics discovered Arnold’s blood sugar was high, Arnold did not show that they deliberately intended to withhold that fact from others. *See Maddox v. City of Los Angeles,*792 F.2d 1408, 1414 (9th Cir.1986).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Arnold’s involuntary medical treatment claim against Oregon Heath Sciences University staff because he did not raise a genuine issue that he was treated after refusing their help. *See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.,*477 U.S. 242, 248^9,106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986).

The district court correctly granted summary judgment on Arnold’s conspira*935cy, privacy, and emotional distress claims because there were no facts in the complaint to support them. *See Taylor v. List,*880 F.2d 1040, 1045 (9th Cir.1989) (citation omitted).

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.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Melvin Smith, Appellant.

[675 NYS2d 905]

Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Egitto, J.), dated October 5, 1995, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and sentencing him to indeterminate terms of 12V2 to 25 years and 2V3 to 7 years imprisonment, respectively, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court (Hall, J.), rendered March 11, 1997, modifying the sentences imposed to 8V3 to 25 years and 5 to 15 years imprisonment, respectively.

Ordered that the judgment rendered October 5, 1995, is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the amended judgment is modified, on the law, by vacating the resentence of an indeterminate term of 5 to 15 years imprisonment imposed upon the conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and reinstating the original sentence of an indeterminate term of 2V3 to 7 years imprisonment; as so modified, the resentence is affirmed.

*471The record establishes that defendant effectively waived his right to be present at sidebar conferences with prospective jurors *(see, People v Antommarchi,*80 NY2d 247). The defendant and his counsel signed a written waiver form in which the defendant acknowledged that he had consulted with his attorney, that he had been informed of his right to be present, and that he wished to give up that right *(see, People v People,*223 AD2d 732; *People v McGee,*214 AD2d 587).

Upon resentencing the defendant, the court should not have disturbed the original sentence imposed on the conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree *(see, People v Hoppie,*220 AD2d 528).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23
                                                                    ----------




                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
                        ---------------------------------

         We  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in the  Registration
Statements  on Form S-8 (Nos.  33-81044,  333-19753,  333-59902  and  333-74197)
(pertaining  to the 1991  Qualified  Stock Option Plan, the Amended and Restated
1993 Stock  Option and  Restricted  Stock  Purchase  Plan,  the 1995 Amended and
Restated  Non-Employee  Director  Stock  Option Plan and the 1998  Non-Executive
Employee  Stock Option and  Restricted  Stock  Purchase Plan) and Form S-3 (Nos.
333-95361, 333-33986, 333-37630, 333-45818, 333-49628, 333-59346, and 333-63514)
of our report dated January 29, 2002 (except for Notes 1 and 10d.2 for which the
date is February 20, 2003) with respect to the consolidated financial statements
of Electric Fuel  Corporation for each of the three years included in the period
ended  December 31, 2001  included in this Annual  Report (Form  10-K/A) for the
year ended December 31, 2001.



                                                /S/ KOST, FORER & GABBAY
                                               ----------------------------
                                                    Kost Forer & Gabbay
                                             A Member of Ernst & Young Global



Tel-Aviv, Israel
May 8, 2003

<PAGE>
MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-11-00574-CV

ChamPale ADAMS,

Appellant

v.

Richard TAUIZON,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 9, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 370658

Honorable Walden Shelton, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: March 14, 2012

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION

Appellant’s brief was due on January 30, 2012. Neither the brief nor a motion for 

extension of time was filed. We, therefore, ordered Appellant ChamPale Adams to file, on or 

before February 27, 2012, appellant’s brief and a written response reasonably explaining (1) the 

failure to timely file the brief and (2) why appellee was not significantly injured by the failure to 

timely file a brief. We warned that if Appellant ChamPale Adams failed to file a brief and the 

written response by the date ordered, we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See
04-11-00574-CV

- 2 -

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal if 

appellant has failed to comply with a court order). Appellant ChamPale Adams has failed to 

respond to our order. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. Costs of appeal 

are taxed against Appellant ChamPale Adams.

PER CURIAM
#### Morrison *v.*Bachert.

Only one counsel will be heard in argument of a case in the supreme court, where there is no appearance for defendant in error and no argument to which to make reply.

March 9, 1888.

March 9, 1886.

Upon argument of Morrison *v.*Bachert, error to C. P. Northampton Co., No. 204, Jan. T., 1886, reported in 112 Pa. 322. Before Mercur, C. J., Gordon, Paxson, Trunkey, Sterrett and Green, JJ. Clark, J., absent.

*H. J. Steele,*with him *Russell C. Stewart, Carroll R Williams, R. Jones Monaghan*and *James Monaghan,*for plaintiff in error.

No counsel appeared for defendant in error.

Mercur, C. J.,

As there is no appearance for defendant in error and no argument to reply to, we can hear only one counsel in argument.

See, also, the next case.
#### Tony Allen WALKER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Rick JACKSON, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 02-7631.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 6, 2003.

Decided March 13, 2003.

Tony Allen Walker, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, Office of the Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Tony Allen Walker seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Walker has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 1039-40, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). In addition, because extraordinary circumstances are not present in this case, we decline to consider claims raised for the first time on appeal. *See Muth v. United States,*1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir.1993). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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.*
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Levcor
         International, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June
         30, 2007 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: August 13, 2007

By:    /s/ Robert A. Levinson
       ------------------------
       Robert A. Levinson
       Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Form 10-QSB
for the Quarterly Period Ended September 30, 1998, and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998 
<CASH>                                              32,485 
<SECURITIES>                                             0 
<RECEIVABLES>                                      402,947 
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0 
<INVENTORY>                                      1,570,471 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,019,501 
<PP&E>                                             932,340 
<DEPRECIATION>                                    (884,342)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,067,499 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,483,145 
<BONDS>                                          1,327,800 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0 
<PREFERRED>                                              0 
<COMMON>                                           987,242 
<OTHER-SE>                                      (2,730,688)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,067,499 
<SALES>                                          8,251,775 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   878,715 
<CGS>                                            7,373,060 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,512,535 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 216,605 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (477,365)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (477,365)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0 
<CHANGES>                                                0 
<NET-INCOME>                                      (477,365)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (0.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.27)
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit








RESOLUTIONS CLARIFYING  
SERP OFFSETS FOR CEO
ACTION BY BOARD OF DIRECTORS
WHEREAS, in 2005, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of CNX Resources Corporation (“CNX” or the "Corporation") adopted a Supplemental Retirement Plan (the "SERP") to provide a select group of key employees with supplemental retirement benefits;
WHEREAS, as a follow-up to its meeting on May 29, 2019 whereby the Board eliminated the qualified plan offset from the SERP, the Board desires to further clarify the SERP offsets for the CEO.  
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board hereby approves a clarifying amendment to the SERP (see Exhibit A) that will eliminate the Corporation’s Restoration Plan offset for the current President and Chief Executive Officer only; and it is further
RESOLVED, that the Board delegates to the Chief Financial Officer, the Vice President - General Counsel and other officers so designated by them (the “Authorized Officers”) the authority to implement the foregoing resolutions; and it is further
RESOLVED, that the Authorized Officers are hereby authorized and directed, in the name and on behalf of the Corporation to take any and all such further actions as such Authorized Officers deem necessary, convenient, incidental or advisable in furtherance of the purpose and intent of any or all of the foregoing resolutions.  
 




















































1The PBO liability will be approximately $800K, and the annual expense will be approximately $175K.  For ease of reference, eliminating the pension offset (which the Board previously approved in May) results in a PBO liability of approximately $600K and an annual expense of approximately $115K.  












Exhibit A
AMENDMENT TO
CNX RESOURCES CORPORATION
SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT PLAN
Pursuant to the authority granted to the Company in Section 7.6 of the CNX Resources Corporation Supplemental Retirement Plan (the "Plan"), the Plan is amended as follows:
1.Section 2.2(a) is amended by adding a new sentence at the end thereof to read as follows:
Notwithstanding the foregoing, for the Participant holding the title of President and Chief Executive Officer as of the date hereof, Section 2.2(b) shall not be apply.    
2.    In all other respects, the Plan is unchanged.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company's duly authorized delegate has caused this Amendment to be executed this 24th day of September, 2019.
CNX Resources Corporation
By:    /s/ Stephanie L. Gill 
Stephanie L. Gill, Esq.
Vice President, General Counsel &  
Corporate Secretary
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

# ACTION:

Notice and request for comments. 

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Small Business Administration's intentions to request approval on a new and/or currently approved information collection. 

# DATES:

Submit comments on or before October 14, 2008. 

# ADDRESSES:

Send all comments regarding whether this information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, whether the burden estimates are accurate, and if there are ways to minimize the estimated burden and enhance the quality of the collection, to Delcine Montgomery, Business Development Specialist, Office of Native American Affairs, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20416. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Delcine Montgomery, Business Development Specialist, Office of Native American Affairs, 202-205-6195,                         *delcine.montgomery@sba.gov*, Curtis B. Rich, Management Analyst, 202-205-7030,                         *curtis.rich@sba.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Native American Affairs (ONAA), is continuing a Native American initiative that will provide Native American Tribes economic development through the use of the Tribal Self Assessment Tool. 

*Title:*                     “Tribal Self Assessment Tool.”                 

*Description of Respondents:*                     Native Americans.                 

*Form Number:*                     N/A.                 

*Annual Responses:*                     1,000.                 

*Annual Burden:*                     2,000.                 

Jacqueline White, 

Chief, Administrative Information Branch.

[FR Doc. E8-18704 Filed 8-12-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.1
                                 CERTIFICATION

I, Deni Leonard, certify that:

   1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Indigenous
        Global Development Corporation;

   2.   Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report; and

   3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
        information included in this annual 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 annual report.

Date: 2/12/2003                          /s/ Deni Leonard
                                         ---------------------------
                                         Chairman of the Board of Directors,
                                         and Chief Executive Officer
219 So.2d 649

#### Cranston CARR v. STATE.

6 Div. 669.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Feb. 20, 1969.

Fred Blanton and Beddow, Embry & Beddow, Birmingham, for petitioner.

MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen., and Marlin Mooneyham, Asst. Atty. Gen., opposed.

LIVINGSTON, Chief Justice.

Petition of Cranston Carr for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision in Carr v. State, 44 Ala.App. 661, 219 So.2d 646.

Writ denied.

SIMPSON, COLEMAN and BLOOD-WORTH, JJ., concur.