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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                                     SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                                               855,149
<SECURITIES>                                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                         411,540
<ALLOWANCES>                                                          24,579
<INVENTORY>                                                           433,852
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                      1,784,673
<PP&E>                                                                15,691,356
<DEPRECIATION>                                                        5,089,086
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                   13,898,005
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            705,067
<BONDS>                                                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                           2,027
<COMMON>                                                              731,621
<OTHER-SE>                                                                 0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                13,898,005
<SALES>                                                              4,895,954
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                      4,998,422
<CGS>                                                               4,221,440
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                         4,221,440
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                      5,275,596
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                               266,383
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                       (551,270)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                          (41,409)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                              (509,861)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                       0
<CHANGES>                                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                                          (509,861)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                         (0.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                         (0.09)
        

</TABLE>
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Easy Care Acupuncture, PC, a/a/o Shellice Reid, Plaintiff-Appellant, -<br><br>against<br><br>MVAIC, Defendant-Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Donald A. Miles, J.), entered September 4, 2015, which denied the parties' respective motions for summary judgment.</p><p>Per Curiam. </p><p>Order (Donald A. Miles, J.), entered September 4, 2015, insofar as appealable, affirmed, with $10 costs.</p><br>This action, seeking recovery of assigned first party no-fault benefits, is not ripe for summary disposition. While the record reflects that defendant properly paid a portion of the submitted claims for acupuncture services pursuant to the workers' compensation fee schedule (<a href="../2013/2013_51860.htm" target="_blank"><i>see Akita Med. Acupuncture, P.C. v Clarendon Ins. Co.</i>, 41 Misc 3d 134</a>[A], 2013 NY Slip Op 51860 [U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2013]), triable issues remain with respect to the claims denied in whole or part by defendant on the stated basis that the maximum payment had already been made for the billed codes (<a href="../2016/2016_50978.htm" target="_blank"><i>see TC Acupuncture, P.C., v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co., </i>52 Misc 3d 131</a>[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 50978[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2016];<a href="../2014/2014_50435.htm" target="_blank"><i> Sunrise Acupuncture PC v Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co., </i>42 Misc 3d 151</a>[A], 2014 NY Slip Op 50435 [U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2014]). The parties' respective submissions reveal the existence of triable issues of fact as to whether defendant partially exhausted the coverage by payments to another provider, and whether those payments were proper under the insurance department regulations. Defendant's failure to deny the claim within 30 days does not preclude a defense that the coverage limits have been exhausted (<a href="../2004/2004_08669.htm" target="_blank"><i>see New York &amp; Presbyt. Hosp. v Allstate Ins. Co.</i>, 12 AD3d 579</a> [2004]).<p>Plaintiff was not aggrieved by that portion of the order which denied defendant's motion for summary judgment, even though plaintiff disagrees with particular findings supporting the order in its favor (<i>see Peoples Natl. Bank of Rockland County v Weiner</i>, 100 AD2d 841 [1984]). Thus plaintiff's appeal from that portion of the order is dismissed.</p><p>We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them unpersuasive.</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concur<br>Decision Date: October 11, 2017<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
Exhibit 10(b)

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

We hereby consent to the use in this Registration Statement on Form N-4 (File No. 33-70984) of our report dated March 25, 2014, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of Protective Life Insurance Company and subsidiaries, which appears in such Registration Statement.  We also consent to the use in this Registration Statement on Form N-4 (File No. 33-70984) of our report dated April 22, 2014, relating to the financial statements of Protective Variable Annuity Separate Account, which appears in such Registration Statement.  We also consent to the reference to us under the heading “Experts” in such Registration Statement.

 

	
/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
    
	
 
    
	
Birmingham, Alabama
    
	
April 29, 2014
EX-10.1



 Exhibit 10.1 
  

			
	



	  	Bottomline Technologies
	  	325 Corporate Drive
	  	Portsmouth, NH 03801
	  	P 603.436.0700

 November 14, 2013 
 Dear
Joe: 
 The letter agreement dated November 18, 2010 (the “2010 Letter Agreement”), between you and Bottomline Technologies set forth the
amended and restated terms under which you would continue to be retained as Chairman for the three-year period ending November 17, 2014. The purpose of this letter agreement (the “2013 Letter Agreement”) is to extend the term of the
2010 Letter Agreement for an additional three years, through November 17, 2017, subject to certain modifications described below. 
  

	A.	For the period commencing on November 17, 2014 and ending on November 16, 2017, Bottomline Technologies agrees to retain your services as Chairman for a fee of $115,000 per year. 


 

	B.	With respect to Sections 4 (Stock Options and Restricted Stock) and 5 (Vesting) of the 2010 Letter Agreement, any references to the date, “November 17, 2014,” shall be replaced with “November 17,
2017”. 

  

	C.	With respect to Section 6 (Health Insurance), the reference to “age 65” shall be replaced with “age 70”. 


Except as otherwise expressly stated herein, all other terms of the 2010 Letter Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 

Agreed as of the date set forth above. 
 BOTTOMLINE TECHNOLOGIES
(de), INC. 
  

									
	By:	 	 /s/ Michael J. Curran
	 		 	By:	 	 /s/ Joseph L. Mullen

		 	Michael J. Curran	 		 		 	Joseph L. Mullen
		 	Chairman of Compensation Committee	 		 		 	
					
	By:	 	 /s/ Daniel M. McGurl
	 		 		 	
		 	Daniel M. McGurl	 		 		 	
		 	Member of Compensation Committee	 		 		 	
					
	By:	 	 /s/ James W. Zilinski
	 		 		 	
		 	James W. Zilinski	 		 		 	
		 	Member of Compensation Committee
Exhibit 10.1

 

SELECT INCOME REIT

 

Summary of Trustee Compensation

 

The following is a summary of the currently effective compensation of the Trustees of Select Income REIT, or the Company, for services as Trustees, which is subject to modification at any time by the Board of Trustees.

 

·                  Each Independent Trustee receives an annual fee of $35,000, plus a fee of $1,000 for each meeting attended. Up to two $1,000 fees are payable if more than one board and board committee meetings are held on the same date.

 

·                  The chairpersons of the audit committee, the compensation committee and the nominating and governance committee, each of whom is an Independent Trustee, receive an additional annual fee of $12,500, $7,500 and $7,500, respectively.

 

·                  Each Trustee receives a grant of 2,500 of the Company’s common shares of beneficial interest on the date of the first board meeting following each annual meeting of shareholders (or, for Trustees who are first elected or appointed at other times, on the day of the first board meeting attended).

 

·                  The Company generally reimburses all Trustees for travel expenses incurred in connection with their duties as Trustees and for out of pocket costs incurred from their attending certain continuing education programs.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

In connection with the Annual Report of Buckeye GP Holdings L.P. (“BGH”)on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Robert B. Wallace, Chief Financial Officer ofMainLine Management LLC, the general partner of BGH, hereby certify, to myknowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)         The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended; and

(2)         Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of BGH.

|                            |     | MAINLINE MANAGEMENT LLC,  as general partner of BGH |
|----------------------------|----------|-----------------------------------------------------|
| Date: March 26,  2007 |     | ROBERT B. WALLACE                                   |
|                       |     | Robert B. Wallace                                   |
|                       | * * | *Chief Financial Officer*                           |

 

----
Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of Porter Bancorp, Inc.



|                           |  |                              |  |                           
|-------------------------- |  | ---------------------------- |  | --------------------------
|Direct Subsidiary          |  | Jurisdiction of Organization |  | Does Business As          
|PBI Bank                   |  | Kentucky                     |  | PBI Bank                  
|Asencia Statutory Trust I  |  | Connecticut                  |  | Asencia Statutory Trust I 
|Porter Statutory Trust II  |  | Connecticut                  |  | Porter Statutory Trust II 
|Porter Statutory Trust III |  | Connecticut                  |  | Porter Statutory Trust III
|Porter Statutory Trust IV  |  | Connecticut                  |  | Porter Statutory Trust IV 
|PBIB Corporation, Inc.     |  | Kentucky                     |  | PBIB Corporation, Inc.    



|                                   |  |                              |  |                                    |  |              
|---------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------- |  | -------------
|Indirect Subsidiary                |  | Jurisdiction of Organization |  | Does Business As                   |  | Parent Entity
|PBI Title Services, LLC            |  | Kentucky                     |  | PBI Title Services, LLC            |  | PBI Bank     
|Durham-Mudd Insurance Agency, Inc. |  | Kentucky                     |  | Durham-Mudd Insurance Agency, Inc. |  | PBI Bank     



81
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 4, 2018

No. 04

- 18

- 00050

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF E.M.M., A CHILD,

From the 407th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016PA01731

Honorable Richard Garcia, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellee’s motion for extension of time to file the appellee’s brief is granted. We order

the appellee’s brief is due on April 17, 2018.

It is so ORDERED on this 4th day of April, 2018

. 

### PER CURIA M

ATTESTED TO:

__________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
SCWC-18-0000656

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI

JERRICO LINDSEY, Petitioner/Petitioner-Appellant,

vs.

STATE OF HAWAIʻI, Respondent/Respondent-Appellee.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-18-0000656; S.P.P. NO. 17-1-0022; CR. NO. 1PC081000643)

ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, and Wilson, JJ., and 

Circuit Judge Remigio, assigned by reason of vacancy)

Petitioner/Petitioner-Appellant’s Application for Writ 

of Certiorari, filed on July 20, 2020, is hereby accepted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no oral argument will be 

held in this case. Any party may, within ten days and pursuant 

to Rule 34(c) of the Hawaiʻi Rules of Appellate Procedure, move 

for retention of oral argument.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, August 26, 2020.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Catherine H. Remigio

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-18-0000656

26-AUG-2020

07:56 AM
#### Stella FAIER, Appellant, v. Mary Pamela DRAKE, a minor, by her father and next friend, Bascom A. Drake, Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division B.

May 25, *1954.*

Rehearing Denied June 16, 1954.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-7327

CALVIN EARL CARTER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DAVID ROBINSON, Respondent - Appellee, and S. K. YOUNG, Warden, Respondent. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-812-3) Submitted: January 19, 2006 Decided: January 25, 2006 Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Calvin Earl Carter, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen R. McCullough, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Calvin Earl Carter seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Carter has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and 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
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6545 

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to expand certain 

authorities with respect to the recall of controlled substances to apply 

with respect to all drugs, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 1, 2022 

Mr. KIM of New Jersey introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to 

expand certain authorities with respect to the recall of 

controlled substances to apply with respect to all drugs, 

and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protecting Americans 

5 from Unsafe Drugs Act of 2022’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6545 IH

1 SEC. 2. NOTIFICATION, NONDISTRIBUTION, AND RECALL 

2 OF DRUGS. 

3 (a) ORDER TO CEASE DISTRIBUTION AND RE4 CALL.—Section 569D of the Federal Food, Drug, and 

5 Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360bbb–8d) is amended— 

6 (1) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘CON7 TROLLED SUBSTANCES’’ and inserting ‘‘DRUGS’’; 

8 (2) by striking ‘‘controlled substance’’ each 

9 place such term appears and inserting ‘‘drug’’; 

10 (3) in subsection (b)— 

11 (A) by striking ‘‘controlled substances’’ 

12 and inserting ‘‘drugs’’; and 

13 (B) by inserting ‘‘of subsection (a)’’ after 

14 ‘‘an order pursuant to paragraph (1) or an 

15 amended order pursuant to subparagraph (B) 

16 or (C) of paragraph (3)’’; and 

17 (4) in subsection (c), by striking ‘‘or an official 

18 senior to such Director’’ and inserting ‘‘or the Direc19 tor of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Re20 search (or an official senior to either such Direc21 tor)’’. 

22 (b) IMPORTS AND EXPORTS.—Section 801(a) of the 

23 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 381(a)) 

24 is amended by striking ‘‘is a controlled substance subject 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 6545 IH

1 to an order under section 569D’’ and inserting ‘‘is a drug 

2 subject to an order under section 569D’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: December 15, 2016 522979 

________________________________

In the Matter of CARL GEE, 

Petitioner, 

v

MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

DONALD VENETTOZZI, as Acting

Director of Special Housing 

and Inmate Disciplinary 

Programs, 

Respondent.

________________________________

Calendar Date: October 25, 2016

Before: Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Garry, Lynch and Rose, JJ.

__________

Carl Gee, Auburn, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J.

Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

__________

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this

Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to

review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and

Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating a

prison disciplinary rule.

Determination confirmed. No opinion.

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Garry, Lynch and Rose, JJ., concur.
-2- 522979 

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without

costs, and petition dismissed. 

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
_____________

No. 95-2362EM

_____________

Keith E. Brown, also known as *

Keith Brown; *

*

Plaintiff-Appellant, *

*

Andre Evans, also known as *

Andre Evans-Bey, *

*

Plaintiff, *

*

v. *

* Appeal from the United States

Paul K. Delo, Supt; Norma * District Court for the Eastern

Lavran, Captain; Lonnie Salts, * District of Missouri.

Lieutenant; Phillip Nixon, *

Sargeant; James McGinley, * [UNPUBLISHED]

Sargeant; David McPeak, COI; *

Joseph Holloway, COI; Donald *

Beauchamp, COI; Lloyd Hodges, *

COI; Earnest Jarvis, COI; *

William Kitchell, COI; William *

Major, COII; Unknown Davis, *

COI; Greg Wilson; Fred Treece; *

Charles W. Harris, CSII; Karen *

Festenmaker; L. Rosenberg; Don *

Roper, Asst. Supt., *

*

Defendants-Appellees. *

_____________

Submitted: June 7, 1996

 Filed: June 14, 1996

_____________

Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

On appeal, Keith E. Brown, a Missouri inmate, challenges the amended

judgment awarding nominal damages following a zero-damage jury award

against two of the defendants in Brown's 42 U.S.C.
-2-

§ 1983 excessive force action. Brown also contends the district court

improperly denied Brown's motion for new trial on the issue of damages.

Because this appeal involves the straightforward application of settled

principles of law, an extended discussion is not warranted. We are unable

to review the nominal damage award because Brown failed to provide a

complete transcript on appeal. Brattrud v. Town of Exline, 628 F.2d 1098,

1099 (8th Cir. 1980) (per curiam). Contrary to Brown's view, a finding of

Eighth Amendment liability does not require an award of actual or punitive

damages. See Smith v. Wade, 461 U.S. 30, 52 (1983); Cummings v. Malone,

995 F.2d 817, 822-23 (8th Cir. 1993). Also, the district court's

submission of a defective nominal damage instruction (stating the jury

"may" rather than "must" award nominal damages) does not constitute plain

error. See Warren v. Fanning, 950 F.2d 1370, 1374 (8th Cir. 1991), cert.

denied, 506 U.S. 836 (1992). Finally, the district court did not commit

error in requiring Brown to pay costs under Rule 68 of the Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure. See O'Brien v. City of Greers Ferry, 873 F.2d 1115,

1120 (8th Cir. 1989). We thus affirm the district court. See 8th Cir. R.

47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 4.59


English Translation for Reference Only


 


Sales Contract for Goods in the Group


 


(Contract No.: RSP13037)


Business Clauses


 


1. Both Parties of this Contract


  





	 	 	The Seller	 	The Buyer
	Company Name:	 	CSUN Trading (HongKong) Co., Limited	 	China Sunergy Europe GmbH
	Legal Representative:	 	Lu Tingxiu	 	Lu Tingxiu
	Business Address	 	Flat 2, 19/F., Henan Building, 90-92 Jaffe RD, Wanchai, Hong Kong	 	
        Sonnenstr.2

        80331 Munich, Germany

	Tel./Fax:	 	 	 	86-25-58096523
	Handled by:	 	 	 	 







 


2. Goods and Prices


 


	Product Name	 	Specification	 	Quantity 
 (PC)	 	 	Quantity
 (W)	 	 	Prices 
 (Є/W)	 	 	Amount
 (Є)	 	 	Remarks
	Polycrystalline silicon solar module	 	245W	 	 	7700	 	 	 	1886500.00	 	 	 	0.49	 	 	 	924385.00	 	 	ESP12087 Order for Spot Goods
	Polycrystalline silicon solar module	 	250W	 	 	21000	 	 	 	5250000.00	 	 	 	0.49	 	 	 	2572500.00	 	 	 
	Polycrystalline silicon solar module	 	255W	 	 	3500	 	 	 	892500.00	 	 	 	0.49	 	 	 	437325.00	 	 	 
	Total:	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	3934210.00	 	 	 
	Total amount: (Є)	 	RMB Three Million Nine Hundred and Thirty-four Thousand and Two Hundred and Ten Only



 


Remarks: The abovementioned price shall be
subject to Incoterms 2000 Version: EXW Antwerp


The export goods shall have tray. The quality
inspection department of the Seller provides the detection report on single piece of such batch of goods within three (3) days
after shipment. The test report should be issued respectively based on the module tray when the test report is issued. Settlement
per actual power.


 


3. Delivery Term and Place: July 2013,
Antwerp warehouse


 




    	 



    	 



    

 


4. Terms of Payment for Goods: Paid by
telegraphic transfer within ninety (90) days from the date of bill of lading.


 


5. Contract Attachment: General Terms of
Sales Contract in the Group


 


	The Seller: CSUN Trading (HongKong) Co., Limited	 	The Buyer: China Sunergy Europe GmbH
	 	 	 
	
        /s/ CSUN Trading (HongKong) Co., Limited

        (Company Seal)
	 	
        /s/ China Sunergy Europe GmbH

        (Company Seal)

	 	 	 
	Date of Signing: