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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-27-1999
<CASH>                                             339
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,651
<ALLOWANCES>                                       417
<INVENTORY>                                     13,432
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                29,333
<PP&E>                                          42,281
<DEPRECIATION>                                  19,447
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  54,934
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,185
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,089
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,709
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    54,934
<SALES>                                         56,596
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                56,596
<CGS>                                           41,072
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   50,854
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    31
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (97)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,520
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,191
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,682
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,509
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,509
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.14


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

AUGUSTIN SANTOS-SANTOS,

 Petitioner,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-70650

Agency No. A099-460-473

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted October 14, 2015** 

Before: SILVERMAN, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Augustin Santos-Santos, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review

of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. 

We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Mohammed v.

Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.

FILED

OCT 20 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
To the extent Santos-Santos presented non-cumulative evidence of hardship

regarding his children’s educational needs, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in

denying the motion to reopen where the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate

any likely impact on the hardship determination in Santos-Santos’s case. See

Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 600 n.6 (9th Cir. 2006) (prima facie

eligibility for relief is demonstrated where “the evidence reveals a reasonable

likelihood that the statutory requirements for relief have been satisfied” (internal

quotations omitted)).

Because the BIA’s determination that Santos-Santos did not demonstrate a

prima facie case for relief is dispositive, we do not reach his remaining

contentions. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (“As a

general rule courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the

decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach.” (citation and quotation

marks omitted)).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

2 11-70650
Exhibit 10.19

                     DAS Communications Consulting Agreement

                             DAS COMMUNICATIONS LTD.

                               83 RIVERSIDE DRIVE

                               New York, NY 10024

J. Patrick Kenny
Drinks Americas, Inc.
372 Danbury Road, Suite 163
Wilton, CT 06897

October 28, 2002

Dear Patrick,

Further to our telephone conversation today I am delighted to work with you as a
consultant in helping to develop spirit and beverage products, utilizing the
direct endorsement or branding of talent which we will help you identify and
come to terms with.

I need some clarification in respect to the retainer and also a little better
understanding about the structure with respect to specific products that we
bring to the table. Specifically with respect to my client roster. I want to
avoid any conflicts with respect to moneys paid to my clients and moneys paid to
DAS Communications LTD, as a consultant.

I would love to sit down with you and your earliest opportunity to flesh out
these details and come to a clear understanding so that we can begin work.

In the short run I wish you well with respect to your financing activities. I
know what that's like and send my sympathies.

Best regards.

Sincerely,

/s/ David Sonenberg

David Sonenberg

DAS.enc.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7652

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

PEDRO MARTINEZ-PATRICIO,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District

Judge. (CR-00-356, CA-02-101-1)

Submitted: May 29, 2003 Decided: June 3, 2003

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Pedro Martinez-Patricio, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Hale Levin,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Pedro Martinez-Patricio seeks to appeal the district court’s

order adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and

denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that

Martinez-Patricio has not made a substantial showing of the denial

of a constitutional right. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 123 S. Ct.

1029 (2003). 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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Randolph L. Chambers

v. Civil No. 04-cv-397-JD

Warden, New Hampshire

State Prison

O R D E R

Randolph L. Chambers, proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis, brought suit against the Warden by filing a motion for

an injunction and damages. Chambers alleged that the Closed

Custody Unit (“CCU”) at the New Hampshire State Prison, where he

is housed, does not have an adequate law library which

constitutes a denial of his constitutional right to access the

courts. Following a hearing before the magistrate judge on

Chambers’s request for a preliminary injunction, the magistrate

recommended that the request be denied due to Chambers’s failure

to show a likelihood of success on the merits of his claim. 

Chambers filed his affidavit, in which he stated that the CCU

library did not have the same computer legal research system as

the general population library. Chambers did not file an

objection to the magistrate’s report and recommendation, which

was approved by the court on June 8, 2005.

The Warden now moves to dismiss Chambers’s suit based on the

findings in the magistrate’s report and recommendation. Chambers

Case 1:04-cv-00397-JD Document 22 Filed 07/27/05 Page 1 of 2
2

has not responded to the Warden’s motion. 

In his report and recommendation, the magistrate found that

Chambers failed to show that he had suffered an actual injury

because of any insufficiency in the CCU library or lack of access

to that library or the general population library. See Lewis v.

Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 349 (1996). That finding was approved by

the court without objection from Chambers. Chambers has not

responded to the Warden’s present motion. Therefore, based upon

the record in this case, Chambers’ claim that his right to access

the court has been violated and his request for injunctive relief

is without merit and must be dismissed. 

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the defendant’s motion to dismiss

(document no. 19) is granted. The complaint is dismissed. The

clerk of court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the

case.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

July 27, 2005

cc: Randolph L. Chambers, pro se

Laura E.B. Lombardi, Esquire

Case 1:04-cv-00397-JD Document 22 Filed 07/27/05 Page 2 of 2
#### The State, ex rel. Sparks, *v.*Wagner et al.

(No. 24419

Decided October 6, 1933.)

*Messrs. Rockwell, Grant, Thomas & Buckingham, Messrs. Smoyer, Kennedy, Smoyer & Vogel,*and *Mr. George W. Rogers,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Ray Watters,*prosecuting attorney, and *Mr. Clyde B. Macdonald,*for defendants in error.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said Court of Appeals be, and the same is hereby, affirmed on authority of *State, ex rel. Schroy,*v. *Wagner, ante,*174.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Stephenson and Bevis, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.2 

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

I, Alan A. Musso, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Bellicum Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Registrant”), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based upon my knowledge: 

| (1) | this Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant. |
|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| Date: March 20, 2015 | /s/ Alan A. Musso                     |
|----------------------|---------------------------------------|
|                 | Alan A. Musso                         |
|                 | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |

 

 

This certification accompanies the Form 10-K to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-K), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.1

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

The undersigned, being the Chief Executive Officer of Archstone-Smith
Operating Trust, a Maryland real estate investment trust (the Issuer), hereby
certifies that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the Periodic Report) of the
Issuer for the quarter ended September 30, 2002, which accompanies this
certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §78m(a)) and that the information
contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.

Date: November 13, 2002

| |                                                                         
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | /S/ R. SCOT SELLERSR. Scot Sellers, Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 05-cr-057-01-JD

Gordon Reid

SEALED ORDER

Jury selection in this case is scheduled for February 7,

2006, with evidence to begin on February 13, 2006. The defendant

has requested and has been granted trial continuances on three

previous occasions. On this date the court has denied a fourth

request to continue the trial on the grounds that the defendant

has not presented a reasonable basis for granting another

continuance.

On January 17, 2006, the defendant filed an ex parte motion

for services other than counsel for the purpose of retaining a

footprint expert (document no. 64). As the defendant indicates

in that motion, he was informed by the government on November 23,

2005, that footprints found at the scene of the alleged crime

were compared with the defendant’s footwear and that a positive

match was made. The defendant has known about this evidence

since November 23, 2005, and now, on the eve of trial, requests

funds for the purpose of retaining an expert to conduct an

Case 1:05-cr-00057-SM Document 77 Filed 01/23/06 Page 1 of 2
2

independent analysis of the footprint evidence. The granting of

this request would necessitate yet another continuance of the

trial. 

This request comes too late and is viewed by the court as

another attempt by the defendant to delay the trial of this

matter once again. The defendant has been aware of the

government’s evidence for two months and has chosen to delay

making this request until the eleventh hour. Under these

circumstances the defendant must accept the consequences, if any,

of his actions. 

Therefore, the motion (document no. 64) is denied.

SO ORDERED.

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

January 23, 2006

cc: Gordon Reid, pro se

Michael J. Iacopino, Esquire

Case 1:05-cr-00057-SM Document 77 Filed 01/23/06 Page 2 of 2
#### In the Matter of Raymond Mirrer, a Former Attorney.

—Motion for reinstatement as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York denied. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Milonas, Asch and Smith, JJ.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Veterans Affairs

In compliance with section 13 of Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) notice is hereby given that the 2008 Annual Report of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Advisory Committee on Minority Veterans has been issued. The report summarizes activities and recommendations of the Committee on matters relative to VA programs and policies affecting minority veterans. It is available for public inspection at two locations:

Mr. Richard Yarnall, Federal Advisory Committee Desk, Library of Congress, Anglo-American Acquisition Division, Government Documents Section, Room LM-B42, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington DC 20540-4172, and 

Department of Veterans Affairs, Center for Minority Veterans, Suite 435, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20420.

By Direction of the Secretary:

Dated: August 29, 2008.

E. Philip Riggin,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. E8-20934 Filed 9-9-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
**
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

**Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906**

**Of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersignedofficers of Rand Capital Corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that: 

TheQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2022 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with the requirement ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofthe Company. 

Dated: May 9, 2022 

 
/s/ Daniel P. PenberthyDaniel P. Penberthy,
Chief Executive Officer and President

(Chief Executive Officer)

Dated: May 9, 2022 

 
/s/ Margaret W. BrechtelMargaret W. Brechtel,
Executive Vice President,

Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
**
Order entered September 26, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 18 - 00698 - CV MICHAEL SUTKER, M.D. , ET AL. , Appellant s

V. DORCAS SIMMONS, Appellee On Appeal from the 298th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC - 17 - 13851



### O RDER Before the Court is appellee’s September 24, 2018 unopposed second motion for an extension of time to file a brief. We GRANT the motion and extend the time to October 15, 2018 . We caution appellee that further extension requests in this accelerated appeal will be disfavored.

/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 19 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  1st Session
H. J. RES. 19

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 1, 2001

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for the appointment of Walter E. Massey as a citizen regent 
        of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That, in accordance with 
section 5581 of the Revised 

Statutes of the United States (20 U.S.C. 43), the vacancy on the Board 
of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, in the class other than 
Members of Congress, occurring by reason of the expiration of the term 
of Frank A. Shrontz of Washington on May 4, 2000, is filled by the 
appointment of Walter E. Massey of Georgia. The appointment is for a 
term of 6 years and shall take effect on the date of the enactment of 
this joint resolution.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 28, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Case 1:04-cv-00405-PB   Document 12   Filed 02/09/06   Page 1 of 4

Case 1:04-cv-00405-PB   Document 12   Filed 02/09/06   Page 2 of 4

Case 1:04-cv-00405-PB   Document 12   Filed 02/09/06   Page 3 of 4

Case 1:04-cv-00405-PB   Document 12   Filed 02/09/06   Page 4 of 4
exv10w3



 






Exhibit 10.3




FIRST AMENDMENT

TO THE

NISOURCE INC. EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN




(EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2004)




     WHEREAS, NiSource Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the NiSource Inc. Executive Deferred
Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2004 (“Plan”); and



     WHEREAS, the Company has reserved the right, pursuant to Section 11.1 of the Plan, to amend
the Plan and now deems it appropriate to do so in order to reflect changes in the investment
options available under the Plan.



     NOW THEREFORE, Exhibit A to the Plan is hereby amended, effective March 1, 2005, to read as
follows:



EXHIBIT A




Investment Options




	 	 	 	 	 
	Fidelity Based Funds
	Contra Fund

	 	Equity Income Fund
	 	Growth & Income Fund
	Growth Company Fund

	 	Magellan Fund
	 	Small Cap Independence Fund
	Europe Fund *

	 	Overseas Fund
	 	Pacific Basin Fund *
	Freedom 2010 Fund

	 	Freedom 2020 Fund
	 	Freedom 2030 Fund
	Freedom 2040 Fund

	 	Freedom Income Fund
	 	Balanced Fund
	Puritan Fund *

	 	Intermediate Bond Fund
	 	Spartan U.S. Equity Index Fund
	

	 	 	 	Managed Income Fund






	 	 	 	 	 
	Non Fidelity Funds
	

	 	American Funds EuroPacific Growth Fund	 	 
	

	 	Dreyfus Emerging Leaders Fund	 	 
	

	 	Janus Small Cap Value Inst. Fund	 	 
	

	 	Morgan Stanley IFT U.S. Small Cap Core Fund	 	 
	

	 	PIMCO Long Term Gov’t Fund	 	 
	

	 	PIMCO Low Duration Fund	 	 
	

	 	PIMCO Total Return Fund Inst.	 	 
	

	 	PIMCO StocksPLUS Fund Inst.	 	 
	

	 	Vanguard U.S. Growth Fund *	 	 
	

	 	Money Market Fund	 	 






 









 












	*	 	Closed to new investments effective March 1, 2005.





     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this First Amendment to be executed on its behalf,
by its officer duly authorized, this 28th day of January, 2005.


	 	 	 	 	 
	 	NISOURCE INC.

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ S. LaNette Zimmerman
 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 




-2-
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 7693** 

CHRISTOPHER FRANK , Petitioner

– Appellant ,
v. TERRY O'BRIEN, Warden , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Elkins
. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. ( 2:11

- cv - 00045

- JPB

- DJJ )

Submitted : May 24, 2012 Decided: May 30, 2012

Before MOTZ and DAVIS , Circuit Jud ges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Christopher Frank, Appellant Pro Se. Helen Campbell Altmeyer, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Christopher Frank , a federal prisoner, appeals the district court ’ s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denyin g relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2011) p etition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Frank v. O’Brien , No. 2:11

- cv - 00045

- JPB

- DJJ (N.D.W. Va. Dec. 7, 2011) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and l egal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED