alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Transportation

###### Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

# AGENCY:

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

# Time and Date:

November 4, 2010, 12 noon to 3 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time.

# Place:

This meeting will take place telephonically. Any interested person may call 877.768.0032, passcode, 4856462 to participate in this meeting.

# Status:

Open to the public. 

# Matters To Be Considered:

The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board  of Directors (the Board) will continue its work in developing and implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement and to that end, may consider matters properly before the Board.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Avelino Gutierrez, Chair, Unified Carrier Registration Board of Directors at (505) 827-4565.

Issued on: October 19, 2010.

Larry W. Minor,

Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.

[FR Doc. 2010-27080 Filed 10-21-10; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
EXHIBIT 31


                                                  CERTIFICATIONS
I, Alfred Coscina, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Pacific Land and Coffee
 Corporation;

2. Based on my  knowledge,  this  annual  report  does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements
were made, not  misleading  with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included in this annual  report,  fairly present in all material
respects the financial  condition,  results of operations  and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others  within those  entities,  particularly  during the
period in which this annual report is being prepared;

     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation,  to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's   board  of  directors  (or  persons   performing   the  equivalent
functions):

     a) all  significant  deficiencies  in the design or  operation  of internal
controls  which  could  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability to record,
process,  summarize  and  report  financial  data  and have  identified  for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls;
and

6. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and I have  indicated in this
annual  report  whether or not there  were  significant  changes in  internal
controls or in other factors that could  significantly  affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent  evaluation,  including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: November 4, 2004

/s/ Alfred Coscina
Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF RIBOZYME PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. FOR THE THREE MONTHS
ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       4,805,279
<SECURITIES>                                   996,475
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,499,772
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,551,197
<PP&E>                                      11,539,060
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,294,591
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              17,683,544
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,691,487
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        91,854
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,812,421
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                17,683,544
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,701,235
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,760,433
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             112,091
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,134,994)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,134,994)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,134,994)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.34)
        

</TABLE>
#### Plant *v.*Wormager and Another.

*Saturday, November*30.

A plea in trespass for breaking the plaintiff’s close and taking his goods, &c., which states, *inter alia,*that the lawful possession of the close was in the defendant, amounts to the general issue.

If a plea to a declaration consisting of two counts, contain no answer to one of them, it is bad on general demurrer. A

A plea founded on an ordinance of a private corporation, without setting out the ordinance or act of incorporation, is bad.

APPEAL from the *Marion*Circuit Court.

Blackford, *J.*

Plant sued the defendants in trespass. The declaration contains two counts. The first is for break*237ing and entering the plaintiff’s close and taking his goods, &c. The second is for taking and carrying aw.ay his goods. The defendants pleaded not guilty, and three special pleas in bar. The first special plea is to the first count, and the others are to' the whole declaration. General demurrers to the special pleas. The Circuit Court overruled the demurrers, and rendered final judgment for the defendants.

*H.*Brown, for the appellant.

*J.*Morrison, for the appellees.

The first special plea attempts to justify the taking of the goods, but expressly states that the defendants had the lawful possession of the *locus in quo.*It contains, therefore, an argumentative denial' of the breaking of.the plaintiff’s close, and amounts to the general issue. The plaintiff might have demurred specially to this plea, or have moved to reject it. But it was not objectionable on general demurrer. It was a good bar, in substance, to the first count. 1

The second special plea, which is pleaded to both counts, attempts to justify the charge in the second count, but is silent as to that in the first. It does not therefore answer all it professes to answer, and is objectionable for that reason.

The third special plea, which is to both counts, is bad, because its only answer to the charge contained in the second count is, that the defendants took the goods under the authority of an ordinance of a private corporation, without setting out the ordinance or the act of incorporation.

The second and third special pleas being bad, and the first one being a bar only to the first count, the final judgment for the defendants on the demurrers is erroneous.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
Exhibit 10.3


 


COLLECTIVE GROWTH CORPORATION


1805 West Avenue


Austin, Texas 78701


 


April 30, 2020


 


Ocelot Capital Management LLC


1805 West Avenue


Austin, Texas 78701


 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


This letter will confirm our agreement that,
commencing on the effective date (the “Effective Date”) of the registration statement (the “Registration
Statement”) for the initial public offering (the “IPO”) of the securities of Collective
Growth Corporation (the “Company”) and continuing until the earlier of (i) the consummation by the Company
of an initial business combination or (ii) the Company’s liquidation of the trust account established in connection with
the IPO (in each case as described in the Registration Statement) (such earlier date hereinafter referred to as the “Termination
Date”), Ocelot Capital Management LLC shall make available to the Company certain office space and administrative
and support services as may be required by the Company from time to time, situated at 1805 West Avenue, Austin, Texas 78701 (or
any successor location). In exchange therefore, the Company shall pay Ocelot Capital Management LLC the sum of $10,000 per month
on the Effective Date and continuing monthly thereafter until the Termination Date. Ocelot Capital Management LLC hereby agrees
that it does not have any right, title, interest or claim of any kind in or to any monies that may be set aside in a trust account
(the “Trust Account”) that may be established upon the consummation of the IPO (the “Claim”)
and hereby waives any Claim it may have in the future as a result of, or arising out of, any negotiations, contracts or agreements
with the Company and will not seek recourse against the Trust Account for any reason whatsoever.


 


[Signature Page Follows]


 




     


     


    

 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 
	 	COLLECTIVE GROWTH CORPORATION
	 	 	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/ Bruce Linton
	 	 	Name: 	Bruce Linton
	 	 	Title:	Chairman and Chief Executive Officer


 


AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY:


 


	OCELOT CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC	 
	 	 	 	 
	By: 	/s/ Andrew Townsend	 
	 	Name: 	Andrew Townsend	 
	 	Title:	Managing Member	 


 


[Signature Page to Administrative Services
Agreement]
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**





Certification
      of Principal Financial Officer


Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350








In
      connection with the accompanying Report on Form 10-Q of Sterling Financial
      Corporation ("Sterling") for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
      Daniel G. Byrne, Principal Financial Officer of Sterling, hereby certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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, as amended;
                and





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






Dated: November
      8 ,
      2007


By: /s/
        Daniel G. Byrne
 **Daniel
        G. Byrne**
 Executive
        Vice President, Assistant Secretary, and
 Chief
        Financial Officer


This
      certification accompanies each Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
      the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by Sterling for purposes of Section
      18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Sterling and will be retained by Sterling and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission upon request.




E-5
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                             323,071
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   489,115
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  13,650,024
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,686,368
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                             70
<COMMON>                                             1,034
<OTHER-SE>                                       9,929,552
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    13,650,024
<SALES>                                          2,899,428
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,899,428
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,300,331
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 249,563
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    357,898
<INCOME-TAX>                                       333,011
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 24,887
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        24,887
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.01)


</TABLE>
ORDER

#### In the Matter of ELAINE SEDERLUND, an attorney at law.

May 12, 1987.

ELAINE SEDERLUND of JERSEY CITY, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1978, having tendered her consent to a disbarment as an attorney at law of the State of New Jersey, and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ELAINE SEDERLUND of JERSEY CITY is disbarred by consent, effective immediately; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent’s name be stricken from the roll of attorneys and that she be permanently restrained and enjoined from practicing law; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent continue to comply with Administrative Guideline No. 28 of the Office of Attorney Ethics dealing with suspended and disbarred attorneys.
# Sitemap

## September 04, 2009

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2009
- 09
- September 04, 2009

            - X-48C in Langley Full-Scale Tunnel
            - Spacewalking In Tandem
            - B.2 Correction
            - Twin NASA Commanders Twitter about Possible Space Meeting
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,333
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,308
<INVENTORY>                                     26,224
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                39,038
<PP&E>                                          17,622
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,596
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  49,486
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,947
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            15
<OTHER-SE>                                       9,305
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    49,486
<SALES>                                         48,277
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                48,277
<CGS>                                           35,426
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   46,197
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   464
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,773
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    771
<INCOME-TAX>                                       327
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                444
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       444
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.29<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.29<F1>
<FN>
<F1>FEBRUARY 26, 1999, THE SHAREHOLDERS OF THE COMPANY APPROVED CERTAIN AMENDMENTS
TO THE COMPANY'S AMENDED AND RESTATED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION THAT EFFECTED A
FOUR-TO-ONE REVERSE STOCK SPLIT OF THE COMPANY'S COMMON STOCK. THE EFFECTIVE
TIME OF THE REVERSE STOCK SPLIT WAS THE END OF BUSINESS ON FEBRUARY 26, 1999.
PRIOR FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULES HAVE BEEN RESTATED TO REFLECT THE REVERSE STOCK
SPLIT.
</FN>


</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT NO. 15


                    INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REVIEW REPORT

TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND STOCKHOLDERS OF
CHROMATICS COLOR SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC.:

We have reviewed the consolidated balance sheet of Chromatics Color Sciences
International, Inc. and Subsidiary as of June 30, 1997 and the related
consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders' equity and cash
flows for the six- and three-month periods ended June 30, 1997 and 1996. These
financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management.

We conducted our review in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A review of interim financial
information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to financial
data and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting
matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance
with generally accepted auditing standards, the objective of which is the
expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole.
Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should
be made to the consolidated financial statements referred to above for them to
be in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.

We have previously audited, in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards, the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 1996, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders' equity,
and cash flows for the year then ended, and in our report dated February 19,
1997, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial
statements, indicating that the financial statements were prepared on a going
concern basis that might not be appropriate due to significant operating losses.
In our opinion, the information set forth in the accompanying consolidated
balance sheet as of December 31, 1996, is fairly stated, in all material
respects, in relation to the consolidated balance sheet from which it has been
derived.

                                               WISS & COMPANY, LLP

Livingston, New Jersey
July 23, 1997

                                      24
#### Gullett and Others *v.*Housh, Administrator.

*Thursday, November*22.

The Courts of this state have no power to set aside their decrees in equity, on motion, after the term at which they are rendered, except in cases, under the statute, of non-resident defendants, infants, &e.

ERROR to the *Jackson*Probate Court.

Dewey, J.

This was a bill in chancery by the heirs of *John*Gullett, deceased, against his administrator, for the recovery of the distributive shares of his estate.

*34*A. C. Griffith,*for the plaintiffs.

*H. P.*Thornton, for the defendant.

The suit was commenced in the Probate Court of *Jackson*county at the *January*term, 1832. Process was regularly served upon the defendant; and at the *March*term, 1832, the parties having appeared, the defendant had leave to answer ten days before the next succeeding term. At that term, the cause was continued on the application of the defendant, no answer having been put in. At the next term, November, 1832, a final decree for 165 dollars and 45 cents .was rendered against the defendant for want of an answer. At the next term after the rendition of the decree, the defendant moved the Court to set the same aside, and to suffer him to file his answer. The motion was granted, and the answer filed. The complainants excepted.

The cause then progressed until the *May*term, 1835, when a final decree was rendered in favour of the defendant for 77 dollars and 24 cents and costs. To reverse this latter decree is the object of this writ of error.

By our statute regulating the practice in chancery, nonresident defendants, infants, &c. are permitted to open decrees, on motion, at a term subsequent to that on which they were rendered; but this provision does not extend to the present case. By the *English*practice, a decree, after it has been regularly enrolled, cannot be opened by motion. A bill of review is necessary. 2 Madd. Pr. 454.—1 Ves. jun. 93. And it has been held by the Supreme Court of the *United Stales,*that the Circuit Courts have no power to set aside their decrees in equity, on motion, after the term at which they are rendered. *Cameron*v. *M'Roberts,*3 Wheat. 591.

Such, we think, is the general rule applicable to the Courts of this state, and that, therefore, the Probate Court erred in setting aside the final decree rendered in this cause at the *November*term, 1832, and suffering the defendant to answer.

*Per Curiam.*

The decree for the defendant rendered at the *May*term, 1835, is reversed, and the proceedings subsequent to the decree for the complainants, rendered at the *November*term, 1832, is set aside, with costs. To be certified, &c.