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

<ARTICLE>                                            5
<MULTIPLIER>                                         1,000
       
<S>                                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                         JAN-31-1998
<CASH>                                               10,412
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        27,488
<ALLOWANCES>                                          1,217
<INVENTORY>                                           7,549
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     45,665
<PP&E>                                                9,697
<DEPRECIATION>                                          250
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       56,547
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                18,456
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                                 85
<OTHER-SE>                                           37,892
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         56,547
<SALES>                                              96,428
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     96,428
<CGS>                                                82,732
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        82,732
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     12,404
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       33
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       1,663
<INCOME-TAX>                                            670
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                     993
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                            993
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           .12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           .12
        

</TABLE>
|Structure Data for U.S. Banking Offices of Foreign Entities

Structure and Share | 
About




December 2023


By Country
  By Type
  ASCIIHome | 
Banking Information and RegulationAccessibility | 
Contact us
Last update: April 11, 2024
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5

A.1. Number of Non-real-estate Bank Loans Made to FarmersMillions

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 1 10 25 100

Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sm

Period Total livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid1993...... 2.70 .36 .27 1.62 .18 .27 1.65 .56 .37 .12 1994...... 2.53 .28 .23 1.56 .18 .27 1.55 .51 .35 .12 1995...... 2.49 .26 .19 1.48 .17 .39 1.45 .57 .36 .12 1996...... 2.22 .18 .17 1.38 .14 .36 1.33 .48 .31 .11 1997...... 2.27 .19 .20 1.40 .15 .33 1.32 .50 .34 .11 1998...... 2.10 .15 .18 1.39 .17 .22 1.20 .45 .33 .12 1999...... 1.96 .14 .16 1.32 .16 .18 1.09 .44 .32 .11 2000...... 1.91 .11 .17 1.30 .13 .19 1.09 .44 .28 .10 2001...... 1.76 .13 .16 1.08 .13 .26 .97 .40 .28 .11 2002...... 1.95 .11 .15 1.34 .12 .23 1.11 .42 .31 .12 2003...... 1.66 .12 .12 1.14 .13 .15 .91 .36 .29 .10 2004...... 1.64 .09 .13 1.15 .13 .14 .87 .36 .29 .12 2002: Q1... 1.76 .14 .16 1.10 .13 .24 .90 .39 .34 .14  Q2... 2.44 .11 .15 1.78 .13 .26 1.44 .52 .34 .14  Q3... 1.95 .07 .14 1.40 .14 .20 1.16 .40 .29 .10  Q4... 1.65 .13 .15 1.09 .07 .20 .92 .36 .28 .09 2003: Q1... 1.69 .13 .14 1.08 .16 .18 .84 .37 .33 .15  Q2... 1.81 .11 .12 1.27 .15 .15 1.07 .37 .27 .09  Q3... 1.58 .08 .09 1.17 .10 .14 .94 .33 .24 .08  Q4... 1.57 .14 .14 1.04 .10 .15 .80 .36 .31 .10 2004: Q1... 1.60 .09 .13 1.12 .12 .15 .81 .33 .32 .14  Q2... 1.88 .08 .13 1.38 .14 .15 1.06 .43 .28 .10  Q3... 1.62 .07 .12 1.17 .14 .12 .93 .36 .23 .10  Q4... 1.44 .12 .13 .95 .10 .15 .67 .33 .32 .13 2005: Q1... 1.37 .10 .12 .94 .07 .14 .68 .29 .28 .12  Q2... 1.79 .11 .10 1.26 .14 .18 .97 .40 .28 .15  Q3... 1.52 .05 .09 1.10 .14 .14 .83 .33 .27 .10  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Quarterly estimates aannual rate and are based on loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
B.1. Farm Debt Outstanding at Commercial Banks

Loan volume Percent change from Percent change from

(billions of dollars) previous quarter previous year

Real Non-real- Real Non-real- Real Non-realTotal estate estate Total estate estate Total estate estate

Quarter loans loans loans loans loans loans loans loans loans

1995: Q3... 65.3 23.8 41.5 2.9 1.1 3.9 3.7 6.3 2.3

 Q4... 63.7 23.9 39.8 -2.5 .4 -4.1 3.9 5.9 2.8

1996: Q1... 61.7 24.0 37.7 -3.1 .5 -5.3 3.1 4.8 2.0

 Q2... 65.7 24.7 41.0 6.5 2.7 8.9 3.4 4.7 2.7

 Q3... 66.6 24.9 41.6 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.9 4.7 .3

 Q4... 65.5 25.0 40.5 -1.6 .3 -2.8 2.8 4.6 1.8

1997: Q1... 63.8 25.4 38.4 -2.6 1.4 -5.1 3.4 5.5 2.0

 Q2... 69.0 26.2 42.8 8.2 3.3 11.5 5.1 6.2 4.4

 Q3... 71.1 27.0 44.2 3.0 2.9 3.1 6.8 8.1 6.0

 Q4... 71.3 27.1 44.2 .3 .7 .0 8.9 8.5 9.1

1998: Q1... 70.1 27.6 42.4 -1.7 1.8 -3.9 9.8 9.0 10.4

 Q2... 75.0 28.5 46.5 7.1 3.2 9.6 8.6 8.8 8.5

 Q3... 76.3 28.9 47.4 1.7 1.3 1.9 7.2 7.2 7.3

 Q4... 74.7 29.3 45.5 -2.0 1.3 -4.0 4.8 7.8 3.0

1999: Q1... 72.7 29.7 42.9 -2.8 1.7 -5.6 3.7 7.6 1.1

 Q2... 75.8 30.8 45.1 4.4 3.5 5.0 1.1 8.0 -3.1

 Q3... 76.8 31.4 45.5 1.3 1.9 .9 .7 8.6 -4.1

 Q4... 76.0 31.8 44.2 -1.0 1.5 -2.8 1.7 8.8 -2.8

2000: Q1... 71.5 31.4 40.1 -5.9 -1.4 -9.2 -1.6 5.5 -6.5

 Q2... 79.7 33.7 45.9 11.4 7.5 14.4 5.0 9.6 1.9

 Q3... 80.1 33.9 46.2 .6 .5 .6 4.3 8.1 1.6

 Q4... 80.9 34.0 46.9 1.0 .3 1.5 6.4 6.8 6.1

2001: Q1... 79.4 34.3 45.1 -1.9 .8 -3.9 11.0 9.2 12.4

 Q2... 82.9 35.1 47.7 4.4 2.5 5.8 4.0 4.2 3.9

 Q3... 82.5 35.4 47.1 -.4 .8 -1.3 3.0 4.5 2.0

 Q4... 82.2 35.6 46.7 -.3 .4 -.9 1.6 4.6 -.5

2002: Q1... 80.1 36.0 44.1 -2.6 1.2 -5.5 .9 4.9 -2.2

 Q2... 83.7 37.0 46.7 4.4 2.7 5.9 1.0 5.1 -2.1

 Q3... 84.4 37.7 46.7 .9 2.1 -.1 2.3 6.5 -.9

 Q4... 83.9 38.0 45.9 -.6 .6 -1.6 2.0 6.8 -1.7

2003: Q1... 82.0 38.7 43.3 -2.3 1.9 -5.7 2.4 7.5 -1.9

 Q2... 84.5 39.6 44.9 3.1 2.5 3.7 1.1 7.3 -3.9

 Q3... 85.5 40.2 45.4 1.2 1.4 1.0 1.4 6.5 -2.8

 Q4... 86.1 40.6 45.5 .6 1.1 .2 2.7 7.0 -.9

2004: Q1... 84.3 41.4 42.9 -2.1 1.9 -5.7 2.8 7.0 -.9

 Q2... 88.9 42.9 46.0 5.4 3.6 7.2 5.2 8.3 2.4

 Q3... 91.5 43.9 47.6 2.9 2.3 3.5 6.9 9.2 4.9

 Q4... 92.3 44.5 47.7 .8 1.5 .2 7.1 9.6 4.9

2005: Q1... 89.3 45.0 44.3 -3.2 1.1 -7.2 5.9 8.7 3.3

 Q2... 93.5 46.2 47.3 4.7 2.7 6.6 5.1 7.7 2.7

 Q3... 96.7 47.1 49.5 3.4 2.0 4.8 5.7 7.4 4.0

 Q4... 97.5 47.6 49.9 .9 1.0 .8 5.7 6.9 4.6

2006: Q1... 96.2 48.4 47.7 -1.4 1.8 -4.4 7.7 7.6 7.7

 Q2... 101.0 49.8 51.2 5.1 2.9 7.2 8.1 7.8 8.3

 Q3... 104.2 51.1 53.0 3.1 2.5 3.6 7.8 8.4 7.1

 Q4... 105.4 52.2 53.2 1.2 2.1 .3 8.1 9.7 6.5

2007: Q1... 105.0 53.4 51.6 -.4 2.3 -3.0 9.2 10.2 8.1

 Q2... 109.3 54.8 54.5 4.1 2.7 5.6 8.2 9.9 6.5

 Q3... 110.8 56.0 54.9 1.4 2.2 .6 6.4 9.5 3.4

 Q4... 112.3 56.8 55.5 1.3 1.5 1.2 6.6 8.9 4.3

 Note. Data are as of end of quarter.

21
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Philip Geary

V.

New Hampshire Department of

Corrections, Interim Warden

Case No. 07-cv-116-PB

C O R R E C T I V E O R D E R

By order dated April 25, 2007, the court granted Plaintiff's

motion to proceed in forma pauperis and ordered him to pay the

initial filing fee as follows: the sum of $18.56 is due no later

than May 23, 2007. As the plaintiff has presented a Petition for

Habeas Corpus, for which the filing fee is $5, this order was

entered in error. The order dated April 25, 2007 is vacated;

Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is hereby

granted and no filing fee payment is due.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Steven J. McAuliffe

Steven J. McAuliffe

United States District Judge

Date: 4 May 2007

cc: Bonnie S. Reed, Financial Administrator

New Hampshire State Prison, Inmate Accounts

Case 1:07-cv-00116-PB Document 6 Filed 05/04/2007 Page 1 of 1

Geary v. NH State Prison, Interim Warden Doc. 6

Dockets.Justia.com
33

C.2. Expected Farm Loan Volume for the Next Quarter, Compared with a Year EarlierPercent

Purpose of loan

Total Feeder cattle Dairy Crop storage Operating 

Quarter Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Hig

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2001: Q4... 19 53 28 24 68 8 16 77 6 28 67 5 12 47 

2002: Q1... 19 54 27 25 68 7 20 72 8 27 67 6 11 49  Q2... 18 63 19 32 64 3 20 73 7 28 65 6 12 60  Q3... 23 54 23 32 64 3 26 67 7 25 69 6 16 49  Q4... 19 58 23 21 70 9 20 74 6 23 73 4 14 50 2003: Q1... 23 53 24 19 73 8 24 71 5 26 72 2 14 46  Q2... 18 65 18 17 78 6 19 75 6 23 71 5 9 63  Q3... 17 61 22 22 65 13 17 78 5 21 71 8 11 60  Q4... 15 58 27 31 59 10 13 80 7 17 76 8 11 54 

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2001: Q4... 24 63 13 18 67 16 16 78 6 11 81 8 19 64 

2002: Q1... 29 55 16 25 65 10 18 75 7 18 77 5 25 59  Q2... 29 60 11 37 58 5 20 74 6 20 74 6 23 58  Q3... 24 63 13 30 60 10 20 73 7 16 76 9 21 58  Q4... 22 66 12 26 58 15 19 75 6 18 76 6 20 64 2003: Q1... 20 67 13 22 69 10 14 84 3 11 85 4 16 67  Q2... 16 66 18 17 70 13 16 79 6 19 75 6 15 69  Q3... 17 72 12 16 65 19 14 81 6 12 85 3 11 76  Q4... 18 68 14 22 62 16 18 80 3 14 84 2 10 76 

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*)

2001: Q4... 25 67 8 30 70 0 18 76 6 29 57 14 19 74 

2002: Q1... 19 70 11 16 76 8 20 72 8 18 79 4 21 69  Q2... 31 62 8 27 73 0 23 77 0 29 67 4 33 63  Q3... 30 57 13 22 78 0 22 78 0 21 63 16 33 59  Q4... 27 53 20 15 69 15 21 71 7 40 53 7 30 50 2003: Q1... 29 53 18 13 75 13 19 75 6 17 67 17 23 55  Q2... 25 60 15 24 71 6 31 63 6 6 78 17 19 71  Q3... 14 71 14 7 80 13 33 60 7 11 74 16 10 81  Q4... 21 74 5 12 82 6 17 78 6 15 75 10 14 82  * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District. Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Saul CORNEJO, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 02-50192.

D.C. No. CR-01-02802-TJW-02.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 4, 2003.*

Decided March 12, 2003.

*345Before LAY,** HAWKINS and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

**

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

MEMORANDUM ***

Cornejo’s argument that Agent Wright was not a credible witness is advanced for the first time on appeal and is not supported by the record, which confirms that the Blazer did pull off the road in an apparent attempt to attract Wright’s attention away from the load car.

In light of the totality of the circumstances, Agent Wright had reasonable suspicion to stop Cornejo’s vehicle. *United States v. Arvizu,*534 U.S. 266, 273-77, 122 S.Ct. 744, 151 L.Ed.2d 740 (2002); *United States v. Diaz-Juarez,*299 F.3d 1138, 1141-42 (9th Cir.2002).

The statute under which Cornejo was convicted, 21 U.S.C. § 841, remains constitutional after *Harris v. United States,*536 U.S. 545, 122 S.Ct. 2406, 153 L.Ed.2d 524 (2002). *United States v. Hernandez,*314 F.3d 430, 437-38 (9th Cir.2002) (rejecting argument that *Harris*overruled *United States v. Buckland,*289 F.3d 558 (9th Cir. 2002) (en banc)).

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.
B.5. Net Charge-offs of Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
                                                                                                            
                                 Estimated volume                Share of outstanding real estate farm loans
                              (millions of dollars)                               (percent)
                      ______________________________________     ___________________________________________

Year                  Total     Q1      Q2      Q3       Q4      Total      Q1        Q2        Q3       Q4
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
                                                                                                            
1995......    |          12       0      3        6        4      .055     -.001      .011     .027     .016
1996......    |           7       0      1        2        4      .031      .000      .003     .009     .017
1997......    |          16      -1      0        3       14      .064     -.003     -.001     .010     .054
1998......    |           6      -1      3        0        5      .022     -.004      .009     .000     .016
1999......    |          15       0      3        5        7      .051     -.001      .011     .015     .022
2000......    |          12     -12      3        8       14      .037     -.037      .009     .022     .040
2001......    |          42      10      9        5       17      .123      .030      .027     .014     .049
2002......    |          35       8      6        5       16      .097      .022      .017     .014     .041
2003......    |          32       4      6        8       14      .082      .010      .015     .021     .034
2004......    |          18       1      5        2       10      .044      .003      .012     .005     .021
2005......    |          17       2     11        4        0      .039      .005      .024     .009     .000
2006......    |        n.a.       2      6     n.a.     n.a.      n.a.      .003      .012     n.a.     n.a.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
   Note. Components might not sum to totals because of rounding. Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.
   n.a. Not available.

25
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1706

To amend the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 to authorize the

Secretary of the Army to reimburse non-Federal interests for managing

recreation facilities and natural resources at water resource development

projects, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 3, 2001

Mr. BEREUTER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

A BILL

To amend the Water Resources Development Act of 1992

to authorize the Secretary of the Army to reimburse

non-Federal interests for managing recreation facilities

and natural resources at water resource development

projects, 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. NON-FEDERAL REIMBURSEMENT.

4 Section 225 of the Water Resources Development Act

5 of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 2328; 106 Stat. 4838) is amended

6 by adding at the end the following:
2

•HR 1706 IH

1 ‘‘(d) NON-FEDERAL REIMBURSEMENT.—The Sec2 retary may pay from Federal appropriations for the non3 Federal share of work carried out under this section by

4 a non-Federal interest if the Secretary has entered into

5 an executed agreement with the non-Federal interest that

6 provides for reimbursement of such payment. The Sec7 retary may pay from Federal appropriations for expendi8 tures for work undertaken by a non-Federal interest in

9 accordance with this section with subsequent reimburse10 ment by the non-Federal interest in accordance with an

11 agreement executed under this section.’’.

Æ
36

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real- Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1estate loans estate loans

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2005: Q1... 7.1 7.1 n.a. 6.6

 Q2... 7.3 7.3 n.a. 6.7

 Q3... 7.6 7.7 n.a. 7.0

 Q4... 8.0 8.0 n.a. 7.3

2006: Q1... 8.3 8.3 n.a. 7.5

 Q2... 8.7 8.8 n.a. 7.9

 Q3... 8.7 8.7 n.a. 7.8

 Q4... 8.7 8.7 n.a. 7.7

2007: Q1... 8.6 8.6 n.a. 7.7

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2005: Q1... 7.8 8.0 7.9 7.4

 Q2... 8.1 8.3 8.2 7.6

 Q3... 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.0

 Q4... 8.9 8.9 8.7 8.1

2006: Q1... 9.0 9.2 8.8 8.2

 Q2... 9.4 9.6 9.2 8.1

 Q3... 9.6 9.7 9.4 8.5

 Q4... 9.5 9.6 9.3 8.7

2007: Q1... 9.4 9.7 9.3 8.6

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 

2005: Q1... 7.6 7.4 7.4 7.2

 Q2... 7.7 7.5 7.5 7.7

 Q3... 8.1 8.0 8.0 7.9

 Q4... 8.6 8.4 8.4 8.0

2006: Q1... 8.9 9.1 8.7 8.4

 Q2... 9.0 9.2 8.8 8.8

 Q3... 9.3 9.2 8.8 8.6

 Q4... 9.3 9.3 8.9 8.4

2007: Q1... 9.1 9.0 8.6 8.3
37

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans (continued)

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1-estate loans estate loans

 Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2005: Q1... n.a. 7.7 7.7 7.3

 Q2... n.a. 7.9 7.9 7.4

 Q3... n.a. 8.2 8.1 7.6

 Q4... n.a. 8.5 8.4 7.9

2006: Q1... n.a. 8.8 8.7 8.1

 Q2... n.a. 9.1 9.0 8.4

 Q3... n.a. 9.2 9.1 8.5

 Q4... n.a. 9.2 9.0 8.4

2007: Q1... n.a. 9.1 9.0 8.4

Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2005: Q1... n.a. 7.4 7.4 7.1

 Q2... n.a. 7.7 7.7 7.3

 Q3... n.a. 7.9 7.9 7.4

 Q4... n.a. 8.3 8.3 7.8

2006: Q1... n.a. 8.4 8.5 7.9

 Q2... n.a. 8.9 8.9 8.4

 Q3... n.a. 9.1 9.1 8.5

 Q4... n.a. 9.0 9.0 8.3

2007: Q1... n.a. 9.0 8.9 8.3

Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA) 

2005: Q1... n.a. 7.7 7.9 7.8

 Q2... n.a. 7.5 7.9 7.9

 Q3... n.a. 8.3 8.2 8.1

 Q4... n.a. 9.0 8.8 8.3

2006: Q1... n.a. 9.0 8.7 8.2

 Q2... n.a. 9.2 8.9 8.4

 Q3... n.a. 9.1 9.0 8.4

 Q4... n.a. 9.0 9.1 8.3

2007: Q1... n.a. 8.9 8.8 8.3

 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of

livestock (including poultry).

 * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.

 n.a. Not available.

 Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
**Exhibit 10.11**

 

**AGREEMENT**

 

March 22,2005

 

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) made as ofthis date between Datameg Corp., a New York corporation (the “Company”), andKanti Purohit (“Consultant”).

 

WHEREAS, Consultant possesses knowledge andskills that can be beneficial to Company; and

 

WHEREAS, the President of the Company (the “President”)recognizes that the Consultant’s contribution to the growth and success of theCompany can be substantial 

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of themutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the parties agree as follows:

 

1. Employment Period. The Company agrees toemploy Consultant on the terms and conditions set forth herein, for the periodcommencing March 22, 2005 and ending on March 22, 2006.

 

2. Position and Duties. Consultant agrees toperform the functions and duties as reasonably prescribed from time to time bythe President. The Consultant agrees to devote his time and efforts to thebusiness and affairs of the Company and the promotion of its interests andperform all duties and services on behalf of the Company necessary to carry outsuch functions.

 

3. Compensation. Consultant and Company agreeto a retainer of $5,000.00, to be paid to Consultant on or before April 15,2005. Consultant will draw down on that amount at an hourly rate of $100 perhour. Consultant will submit detailed billing information to Company on amonthly basis. Consultant will notify, in writing, Company whenever theretainer balance drops below $1,000.00; after receiving written notice, Companywill pay a further retainer of $5,000.00 within 10 days of such notice. Iftermination of Consultant, as defined in Section 5 below, takes place orif Consultant resigns or otherwise ends his relationship with the Company forany reason whatever, Consultant agrees to return any unused retainer monies tothe Company.

 

4. Expenses. Consultant will be reimbursedfor any employment-related expenses incurred by him during the course of theemployment period.

 

5. Termination. Consultant’s employment andassociation with the Company may be terminated at any time for cause or for anyreason whatever. Company and Consultant agree that this Agreement constitutesan “at will” agreement.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executedthis Agreement effective on the date and year written above.

 
|                      |   | Datameg Corp.            |
|---------------------------|--------|--------------------------|
|                      |   |                     |
|                      |   |                     | By: |   |   |
|                      |   |                     |
|                      |   |                     |
| /s/ Kanti Purohit         |   |                     | By: | /s/ Andrew Benson |   |
| Kanti Purohit, Consultant |   | Andrew Benson, President |
|                           |        |                          |  |  |  |  |

 

1

----
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1866 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1866

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

    To amend title 35, United States Code, to clarify the basis for 
            granting requests for reexamination of patents.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1866

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To amend title 35, United States Code, to clarify the basis for 
            granting requests for reexamination of patents.

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

SECTION 1. DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL NEW QUESTION OF PATENTABILITY 
              IN REEXAMINATION PROCEEDINGS.

    Sections 303(a) and 312(a) of title 35, United States Code, are 
each amended by adding at the end the following: ``The existence of a 
substantial new question of patentability is not precluded by the fact 
that a patent or printed publication was previously cited by or to the 
Office or considered by the Office.''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to any 
determination of the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark 
Office that is made under section 303(a) or 312(a) of title 35, United 
States Code, on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 5, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```