alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Restated Service Agreement



 EXHIBIT 10(y) 
  
 FINANCIAL TERMS 
  
 1. Budgeted Provider Expense [§4.13(a)]. For purposes of the Budget for calendar year 2004, the following percentages of Adjusted Gross
Revenue shall be allocated to Provider Expense for the following calendar quarters, respectively: 
  

													
	Qtr. 1

	 	Qtr. 2

	 	 	Qtr. 3

	 	 	Qtr. 4

	 	 	Full Year

	 
	26.2%	 	26.0	%	 	25.8	%	 	25.8	%	 	26.0	%

  
 In each succeeding
annual Budget, unless the Parties otherwise mutually agree, such percentages of Adjusted Gross Revenue shall be allocated to Provider Expense for the respective calendar quarters of the applicable calendar year. 
  
 2. Service Fee [§7.3(a)]. The quarterly Service Fee for each
calendar quarter in calendar year 2004 shall be the lesser of (a) the Actual Margin for such calendar quarter, or (b) the amount set forth below for such calendar quarter: 
  

													
	Qtr. 1

	 	Qtr. 2

	 	Qtr. 3

	 	Qtr. 4

	 	Full Year


	$2,762,756	 	$	2,851,096	 	$	2,580,993	 	$	2,971,394	 	$	11,166,239

  
 The Service Fee for
each subsequent calendar quarter shall be an amount equal to the lesser of (i) the Actual Margin for such calendar quarter, or (ii) the aggregate amount of the Service Fee and the Performance Fee paid or payable with respect to the corresponding
calendar quarter in the immediately preceding calendar year (after giving effect to any adjustments under §7.4 of this Agreement). Notwithstanding the other provisions of this Agreement, for purposes of applying the immediately preceding
sentence only: (A) the Performance Fee and the related adjustment, if any, under §7.4 shall be calculated each calendar quarter (substituting “calendar quarter” for all references to “calendar year” in §7.3(b) and
§7.4 for that purpose), and (B) the Performance Fee so calculated for any calendar quarter shall be deemed to be the Performance Fee payable for that calendar quarter under the immediately preceding sentence. 
  
 3. Performance Fee Adjustment Percentage. For purposes of the monthly
calculation and accrual of the Performance Fee Adjustment under Section 7.4 of the Service Agreement, Provider acknowledges and agrees that this amendment is being entered into for calendar year 2004 and that the Adjustment Percentage for such
calendar year is 40%. 
  
 4. Adjustments. Any or all of the
percentages or amounts contained in this exhibit may hereafter be changed from time to time by written agreement of the Parties. Such agreement may be in the form of a new Exhibit A-1 to this agreement, which, if signed by both Parties, shall
supersede this exhibit for all purposes thereafter. 
  
 The
effective date of this Exhibit A-1 is January 1, 2004. 
  

							
	 PDG, P.A.
	 	 PDHC, LTD.

				
	 By
	 	 /s/ Dr. Gregory T. Swenson

	 	 By
	 	 /s/ Michael J. Vaughan


	 	 	 Gregory T. Swenson, D.D.S., President
	 	 	 	 Michael J. Vaughan, Vice President
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

v. Criminal No. 09-cr-30-02-GZS 

Elaine Brown 

CLERK'S SUPPLEMENTAL CERTIFICATE TO 

CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS 

I, Deborah A. Eastman-Proulx, Deputy Clerk of the United States District Court for the 

District of New Hampshire, do hereby certify that the following documents constitute the 

supplemental record on appeal to the First Circuit Court of Appeals: 

DOCUMENT: Notice - No Exhibit Designation Filed 

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I hereunto set my 

hand and affix the seal of said Court, at Concord, 

in said District, on this day, November 9, 2009. 

cc: Arnold Huftalen, Esq. 

Terry Ollila, Esq. 

Bjorn Lange, Esq. 

AMES R. STARR, Clerk 

By: /s/ Deborah A. E Eastman-Proulx, Deputy Clerk 

Case 1:09-cr-00030-GZS Document 231 Filed 11/09/2009 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02244-RM-MJW

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

RICHARD WILMER, and

ROCK WEISS,

Defendant(s).

MINUTE ORDER 

Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant Rock Weiss’ Motion for Leave to File

Response in Opposition to the Government’s Motions for Costs (docket no. 106) is

GRANTED finding good cause shown. Defendant Rock Weiss’ Response in Opposition

to the Government’s Motion for Costs (docket no. 106-1) is accepted for filing, and this

court will consider this Response (docket no. 106-1) when it rules on Plaintiff USA’s

Motion for Conditional Order on Costs (docket no. 89). 

Date: June 25, 2013

Case 1:11-cv-02244-RM-MJW Document 122 Filed 06/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
17

A.12. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Large Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, November 3-7, 2Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not ratVolume of loans (thousands of dollars) 1,408,572 50,840 141,845 589,585 477,713 26,856 4,5Number of loans 18,875 839 2,145 10,125 3,329 534 Weighted average maturity (months)1 25.53 9.17 12.67 19.58 23.06 9.53 10.0

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 7.02 6.31 4.02 9.69 2.02 .49 .

Weighted average risk rating3 3.22 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n

Weighted average interest rate 4 4.56 5.53 4.94 4.49 4.20 5.20 3.0

 Standard error5 .19 .75 .21 .34 .46 .39 1.

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 5.65 6.40 6.00 5.64 5.22 6.16 3.5 25th percentile 3.56 4.18 4.07 3.30 3.30 4.07 1.5 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 4.68 4.84 5.21 4.70 3.57 4.80 n Other livestock 4.36 6.40 5.30 4.30 4.34 4.07 n Other current operating expenses7 4.54 5.74 4.75 4.53 3.97 5.77 6.

 Farm machinery and equipment 5.77 n.a. 6.25 5.86 5.13 n.a. n Farm real estate 5.83 6.25 5.46 6.72 4.62 n.a. n Other8 3.98 4.62 3.76 3.68 4.30 4.39 2.

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 84.59 28.31 69.26 88.24 91.10 87.01 93. Under commitment 79.81 68.91 69.34 87.40 85.45 97.64 51.9 Callable 15.80 60.26 35.14 18.41 3.50 6.64 n Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 8.64 25.79 27.70 4.69 4.88 .90 n Other livestock 10.31 .58 3.65 10.12 16.16 1.88 n Other current operating expenses7 40.03 60.30 51.65 42.57 34.32 58.60 6. Farm machinery and equipment 2.02 n.a. 3.22 2.34 1.21 n.a. n Farm real estate 11.88 10.02 7.89 9.44 11.68 n.a. n Other8 27.12 3.31 5.88 30.84 31.75 38.63 93.

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 11.46 15.36 6.85 12.62 5.60 6.01 n Other 85.83 83.01 89.16 83.98 92.96 93.99 93. Note. Most large farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had more than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of International
Electronics, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended August 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, John Waldstein, President, Chief Executive Officer,
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                                                                         
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ John Waldstein                                                       
|John Waldstein                                                           
|President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|                                                                         
|Dated: December 7, 2005
## nlfllft. ifekkn Ausml,-rmswn ^ ^.^m US. > ou liiESMori&te M Csfh ®t'allnecesaHm'Acunimhirttibih -fodtuaSfry kjf+h he /jouf-f and luImPs -#?£ fe -b iObhf/1 h&t docu/iimh. DaI 4. ID, lb" Made -Ihese •skti-flT&fh. Stni/rd/' Wllfttboldw

MJ3|9'mS03ty(eqV sivaddviVNiwiaodoianoo NIQ3AI303d
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-172-01-SM

Douglas Heath

O R D E R

Defendant Bennett’s motion to continue the final pretrial conference and

trial is granted (document 14). Trial has been rescheduled for the May 2007

trial period. Defendant Heath shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not later

than February 9, 2007. On the filing of such waiver, his continuance shall be

effective. 

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Final Pretrial Conference: April 23, 2007 at 3:00 p.m.

Jury Selection: May 1, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:06-cr-00172-SM Document 15 Filed 02/02/07 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

February 2, 2007

cc: Bjorn Lange, Esq.

Helen Fitzgibbon, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00172-SM Document 15 Filed 02/02/07 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                             586
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,483
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     31,218
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                             245
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               245
<LOANS>                                         34,527
<ALLOWANCE>                                        498
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  70,378
<DEPOSITS>                                      35,693
<SHORT-TERM>                                    14,100
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                468
<LONG-TERM>                                     12,532
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             6
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,549
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  70,378
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  1,444
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,107
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    32
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 2,583
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 795
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,688
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                              895
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      240
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  28
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    566
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    252
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         252
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       146
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .31
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    .072
<LOANS-NON>                                        362
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   324
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       68
<RECOVERIES>                                         2
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  498
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               498
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

              SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of CDSI Holdings Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J.
Bryant Kirkland III, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

     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.


May 15, 2008                            /s/ J. Bryant Kirkland III
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        J. Bryant Kirkland III
                                        Vice President and Chief Financial
                                        Officer
---

All files contain data as of the current quarter. Files in comma-separated variable 
(CSV) format contain all available historical data.

|Section B
Selected Statistics from the Quarterly Reports of Condition of Commercial Banks  
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                            
|
|B.1. Farm Debt Outstanding at Commercial Banks                                              
|ASCII (4 KB)                                                                                
|B.2. Delinquent Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks                 
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                                                
|B.3. Net Charge-offs of Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks         
|ASCII (2 KB)                                                                                
|B.4. Delinquent Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks                     
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                                                
|B.5. Net Charge-offs of Real Estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks             
|ASCII (2 KB)                                                                                
|                                                                                            
|
|B.6. Distribution of Agricultural Banks by Share of Their Total Loans that are Nonperforming
|ASCII (4 KB)                                                                                
|B.7. Selected Measures of Financial Performance of Agricultural and Other Small Banks       
|ASCII (6 KB)                                                                                
|B.8. Average Loan-Deposit Ratios at Agricultural Banks in Selected Federal Reserve Districts
|ASCII (10 KB)                                                                               
|B.9. Number of Agricultural Bank Failures                                                   
|ASCII (2 KB)                                                                                
|                                                                                            

Statistical releases

---

Home Economic research and data  Accessibility Contact Us  Last update: January 25, 2006
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

 v. Case No. 07-cr-109-01-SM

Gary Powers

O R D E R

Defendant's assented-to motion to continue the trial (document no. 12) is granted.

Trial has been rescheduled for the January 2008 trial period. Defendant shall file a

Waiver of Speedy Trial Rights not later than October 3, 2007. On the filing of such

waiver, his continuance shall be effective.

The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh

the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny the

defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation taking into account

Case 1:07-cr-00109-SM Document 13 Filed 09/26/07 Page 1 of 2
2

the exercise of due diligence under the circumstances.

Final Pretrial Conference: December 17, 2007 at 4:00 PM 

Jury Selection: January 8, 2008 at 9:30 AM

SO ORDERED.

September 26, 2007 _________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Arnold Huftalen, Esq.

 Michael Shklar, Esq.

 U. S. Probation

 U. S. Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00109-SM Document 13 Filed 09/26/07 Page 2 of 2
IIB

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2061

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 21, 2001

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

AN ACT

To amend the charter of Southeastern University of the

District of Columbia.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 2061 RFS

1 SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS TO CHARTER OF SOUTH2 EASTERN UNIVERSITY REGARDING BOARD

3 OF TRUSTEES.

4 Section 3 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act for the relief

5 of the Southeastern University of the Young Men’s Chris6 tian Association of the District of Columbia’’, approved

7 August 19, 1937 (50 Stat. 697), as amended by section

8 1 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to amend the charter of

9 Southeastern University of the District of Columbia’’, ap10 proved October 10, 1966 (80 Stat. 883), is amended—

11 (1) in the first sentence, by striking ‘‘, one12 third of whom’’ and all that follows and inserting a

13 period; and

14 (2) in the second sentence, by striking ‘‘elected

15 for a term’’ and inserting ‘‘elected by the board for

16 a term’’.

17 SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF CURRENT TRUSTEES.

18 The amendment made by section 1 shall not affect

19 the term of office of any individual serving on the Board

20 of Trustees of Southeastern University as of the date of

21 the enactment of this Act.

Passed the House of Representatives September 20,

2001.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40243 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. DAVID LESLIE ROSE Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:06-CR-685-1
Before KING, DAVIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * David Leslie Rose appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession ofchild pornography. He argues that (1) the district court violated his Fifth Amendment privilege in imposing an above-guideline sentence and, alternatively, (2) the sentence was unreasonable. We affirm. Rose argues that the district court violated his right against selfincrimination when it adversely inferred from his silence that he had committed the allegations of sexual abuse contained in the Presentence Report (PSR) to United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D January 3, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-40243

2 upwardly depart from the advisory guideline range. Rose did not preserve this constitutional issue for review, and, therefore, we review for plain error only. See United Statesv. Martinez, 496 F.3d 387, 389 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 2007 WL 3265472 (U.S. Dec

. 3, 2007) (No. 07-7436). When Rose invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege, the district court c onstrued his silence as a refusal to controvert the allegations, thereby entitling the court to rely on them as a basis for an upward departure. See F ED
. R. C RIM
. P. 32(i)(3)(A); United States v. Romero-Rendon, 220 F.3d 1159, 1163 n.4 (9th Cir. 2000). Rose has shown no Fifth Amendment error on the part of the district court, plain or otherwise. Rose alternatively argues that his non-guideline sentence was unreasonable because the hearsay allegations of sexual abuse contained in the PSR lacked sufficient indicia of reli ability, but were nevertheless given significant weight, and the sentence did not account for a factor that should have received significant weight, i.e. his acceptance of responsibility for the offense. The reliability of Rose’s ex-wife’s hearsay allegations was bolstered by his daughter’s corroborative statement that her aunts had been sexually abused by Rose and, additionally, by information that Rose’s post-divorce contact with his daughters was restricted. The hearsay evidence, which Rose failed to rebut, carried sufficient indicia of reliability such that the district court was entitled toadopt that information without further inquiry. SeeUnited Statesv. Ramirez, 367 F.3d 274, 277 (5th Cir. 2004); United Statesv. Golden, 17 F.3d 735, 736 (5th Cir. 1994). Rose’s argument that his acceptance of responsibility precluded the district court from upwardly departing to the statutory maximum i s unpersuasive. He has therefore not shown the sentence to be unreasonable. See United States v. Smith, 440 F.3d 704, 706, 708 (5th Cir. 2006). AFFIRMED.