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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000837290
<NAME> KEY PRODUCTION COMPANY, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           3,419
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,006
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,796
<PP&E>                                         130,699
<DEPRECIATION>                                  34,881
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 107,717
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,091
<BONDS>                                         24,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,943
<OTHER-SE>                                      56,998
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   107,717
<SALES>                                          9,421
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,516
<CGS>                                            5,358
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,358
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   750
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 374
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,295
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,252
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,043
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,043
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .17
        

</TABLE>
No. 87-986.

#### Breier *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

EMOJI COMPANY GmbH, )

) Case No. 20-cv-5068

Plaintiff, ) 

)

) Judge Virginia M. Kendall

v. )

)

THE INDIVIDUALS, CORPORATIONS, )

LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES, )

PARTNERSHIPS AND UNINCORPORATED )

ASSOCIATIONS IDENTIFIED )

ON SCHEDULE A HERETO, )

)

Defendants. )

PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff EMOJI COMPANY 

GmbH hereby dismisses with prejudice all causes of action in the complaint against the following 

Defendants identified in Schedule A. Each party shall bear its own attorney’s fees and costs.

No. Defendant 

36 Maserfaliw

50 OPRINT

76 lilttleli

273 One Bear

The respective Defendants have not filed an answer to the complaint or a motion for summary 

judgment in this matter. Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) is 

appropriate.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: February 5, 2021 By: s/Michael A. Hierl _ 

Michael A. Hierl (Bar No. 3128021)

William B. Kalbac (Bar No. 6301771)

Hughes Socol Piers Resnick & Dym, Ltd.

Three First National Plaza

70 W. Madison Street, Suite 4000

Chicago, Illinois 60602

(312) 580-0100 Telephone

mhierl@hsplegal.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

EMOJI COMPANY GmbH

Case: 1:20-cv-05068 Document #: 67 Filed: 02/05/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:3177
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned attorney hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of 

Voluntary Dismissal was filed electronically with the Clerk of the Court and served on all counsel of 

record and interested parties via the CM/ECF system on February 5, 2021.

s/Michael A. Hierl

Case: 1:20-cv-05068 Document #: 67 Filed: 02/05/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:3178
In the Senate of the United States,

November 24, 2004.

Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 4012) entitled ‘‘An Act to amend the District of

Columbia College Access Act of 1999 to reauthorize for 5 additional years the public school and private school tuition assistance programs established under the Act.’’, do pass with

the following

AMENDMENTS:

1 Ω1æPage 2, line 7, strike ‘‘10 succeeding’’ and insert:

2 7 succeeding

3 Ω2æPage 2, line 11, strike ‘‘10 succeeding’’ and insert:

4 7 succeeding

Amend the title so as to read: ‘‘An Act to amend the

District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 to reauthorize for 2 additional years the public school and pri-
 †

2

HR 4012 EAS

vate school tuition assistance programs established under

the Act.’’.

Attest:

Secretary.
108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4012

AMENDMENTS
ILND 450 (Rev. 10/13) Judgment in a Civil Action

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Robert T. Baker,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

Stephenson County,

Defendant(s).

Case No. 20 CV 50310

Judge Iain D. Johnston

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

Judgment is hereby entered (check appropriate box):

in favor of plaintiff(s)

and against defendant(s)

in the amount of $ ,

which includes pre–judgment interest. 

does not include pre–judgment interest.

Post-judgment interest accrues on that amount at the rate provided by law from the date of this judgment. 

Plaintiff(s) shall recover costs from defendant(s).

in favor of defendant(s) 

and against plaintiff(s)

.

Defendant(s) shall recover costs from plaintiff(s).

other: This case is dismissed with prejudice and without an award of costs.

This action was (check one):

tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has rendered a verdict. 

tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision was reached. 

decided by Judge Iain D. Johnston on a motion (stipulation) to dismiss.

Date: 1/22/2021 Thomas G. Bruton, Clerk of Court

Yvonne Pedroza , Deputy Clerk

Case: 3:20-cv-50310 Document #: 24 Filed: 01/22/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:107
10496, 10497.

#### National Union Fire Insurance Co. *v.*Macon Hardwood Lumber Co.; and *vice versa.*

Jenkins, P. J.

The question in this case is whether the policy of fire insurance sued on remained of force, at the time of the fire, or whether it had been cancelled by virtue of the company’s notice to that effect given to White as plaintiff’s agent, and the acceptance by him of such notice of cancellation. Under the evidence in the case it was a disputed question of fact as to whether White, as the broker of the plaintiff, had been authorized merely to procure insurance for the owner (in which event the notice of cancellation given to such an agent would *727be ineffective and the defendant would be liable under the policy), or whether the owner had constituted White as his continuing agent not only to insure but to keep the property insured, with power to select the insurer (in which event the notice of cancellation given to such an agent would bind the owner). 14 R. O. L. 1010, § 189; McGraw Woodenware Co. *v.*German Fire Ins. Co., 126 La. 32 (52 So. 183, 20 Am. Cas. 1229, 38 L. R. A. (N. S.) 614, 623) Since, under the evidence of the plaintiff on the one hand and the course of dealings which it was sought to set up by the evidence submitted for the defendant on the other hand, the nature and character of the agency was thus made a disputed issue of fact, the judge erred in directing a verdict in favor of the plaintiff.

Decided February 7, 1920.

Action on insurance policy; from Bibb superior court—Judge Matbews. March 11, 1919.

*King & Spalding, Miller & Jones, Daniel MacDougald,*for the insurance company. •

*L. D. Moore,*contra.

2. In view of the ruling made in the foregoing paragraph, the assignment of error in the cross-bill of exceptions, to the effect that the judge erred in not also entering up judgment for attorney’s fees and damages, is under the present status of the case necessarily without merit. The cross-bill of exceptions also assigns error upon the admission in evidence of certain conversations had between certain agents of the defendant company and White, with reference to the cancellation of the policy used on. If, however, the continuing agency of White should, under the evidence, be taken as having been established by virtue of the proved circumstances, the apparent relations, and the conduct of the owner in reference to his course of dealings with White as such agent, then the evidence objected to could not properly be' accounted irrelevant, and for this reason the exception taken to its admission is without merit. *Cable Co.*v. *Walker,*127 *Ga.*65 (56 S. E. 108). The other exceptions taken in the cross-bill, not being argued by counsel, will be treated as abandoned.

*Judgment on main bill of exceptions reversed; on the cross-bill affirmed.*

*Stephens and Smith, JJ., concur.*
10193.

#### Citizens Bank *v.*Town of Ludowici *et al.*

Decided September 20, 1919.

Complaint; from Liberty superior court—Judge Sheppard. September 17, 1918.

*Oliver & Oliver, Seabroolc & Kennedy,*for plaintiff.

*Melmlle Price, Parker & Parker,*for defendant.

Per Curiam.

1. The petition as originally filed showed an action in three counts against a municipal corporation and its mayor and aider-man individually, to recover on a promissory note given to secure a loan to the municipality. In one.of the counts an action for money had and received was attempted, but, while it was so designated by the pleader, its recitals plainly evidence an action on a contract.

*(a)*The petition, failing to show that the debt evidenced by the note sued on was within the municipality’s power to contract or within the saving exceptions of the constitution (Civil Code, § 6563), was subject to the general demurrer interposed. See *Whigham*v. *Gulf Refining Co.,*20 *Ga. App*427 (5, 6), 428 (93 S. E. 238).

2. The defect stated above was not cured by the amendment seeking to elaborate the 3d count of the petition and to convert the action into one for money had and received (even if such procedure were permissible), and the amendment was properly disallowed. The statement therein that “the money had and received by said defendants from petitioner . . became money actually and beneficially applied' by the said defendants to the authorized objects and lawful municipal uses of the said Town of Ludowici, or for which revenue or money of the said Town of Ludowici may be lawfully used and applied by said Town of Ludowici,” was a mere conclusion of the pleader, there being no facts recited to authorize it. See, in this connection, *Butts County*v. *Jackson Banking Co.,*129 *Ga.*801, 810, 811 (60 S. E. 149, 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 567, 121 Am. St. R. 244) ; *Tate*v. *Elberton,*136 *Ga.*301 (2) (71 S. E. 420); *City of Dawson*v. *Waterworks Co.,*106 *Ga.*697 (6), 707, 734 (32 S. E. 907).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, P. J., Bloodioorth and Stephens, JJ., eoneur.*
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theamendment to the Quarterly Report of Mesaba Holdings, Inc. and subsidiaries(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), the undersigned hereby certify 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) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated:  August 19, 2003 | By:                                                    |  /s/  Paul F. Foley  |   |
|-------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|--------|
|                    | Paul F.  Foley                                         |                      |
|                    | President  and Chief Executive Officer                 |
|                    |                                                   |                      |
| Dated:  August 19, 2003 | By:                                                    |  /s/  Robert E. Weil |   |
|                    | Robert E.  Weil                                        |                      |
|                    | Vice  President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |
|                         |                                                        |                           |        |  |

 

A signed original of thiscertification has been provided to the Company and will be retained by theCompany and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.

 

1

----
#### CROUCH v. JONES

No. 94P97

Case below: 125 N.C.App. 421

Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 June 1997. Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 June 1997.
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



I,
Thomas G. Tachovsky, Ph.D., President and Chief Executive Officer of Entropin, Inc. (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:



(a) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the
fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



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



Dated: May 12, 2004

|    |  |                                      
|--- |  | -------------------------------------
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/ Thomas G. Tachovsky, Ph.D.       
|    |  |                                      
|    |  | Thomas G. Tachovsky, Ph.D.           
|    |  | President and Chief Executive Officer



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Entropin, Inc. and will be retained by Entropin, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
---

---

EXHIBIT 15.(a).1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File
No. 333-120559) pertaining to the Employees Stock Option Plan of Syneron Medical Ltd. of
our report dated May 5, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of
Syneron Medical Ltd. and subsidiaries included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F for the
year ended December 31, 2007.

|              |                                 
|------------- | --------------------------------
|Haifa, Israel | /s/ Kost Forer Gabbay & Kasierer
|May 5, 2008   | KOST FORER GABBAY & KASIERER    
|              | A Member of Ernst & Young Global



---

---
## JUN 0 3 2016

ACIE K. LI EMAN Qta M RT tyl CLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

ALESSI & KOENIG, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, Appellant, vs. THLSA, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; AND THE ESTATES AT SEVEN HILLS OWNERS ASSOCIATION, A NEVADA LEGAL ENTITY, Respondents. No. 69328 

# FILED

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL This is an appeal from a November 4, 2015, district court order entered in an action relating to the sale of real property. On April 4, 2016, we ordered appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. We explained that it was unclear if the district court had formally resolved the counterclaim, cross-claim, and third party claim filed on April 18, 2013. We also noted that it appeared that the November 4, 2015, district court order was not a final judgment because it states that the amount of damages is yet to be determined. 

### See NRAP 3A(b)(1); 

### Lee v. GNLV, Corp., 116 Nev. 426. 996 P.2d 416, 417 (2000). We gave appellant 30 days within which to respond, cautioning that failure to demonstrate that we have jurisdiction could result in the dismissal of this appeal. To date, appellant has not responded. Accordingly, appellant fails to demonstrate that this court has jurisdiction over this appeal, 

### see Moran v. Bonneville Square Assocs., 117 Nev. 525,

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

RR 1947A seJ.

527, 25 P.3d 898, 899 (2001) (the burden lies with appellant to demonstrate that this court has jurisdiction), and we

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED. 1



# . / P 7VA < Douglas J.

cc: Hon. Susan Scann, District Judge Alessi & Koenig, LLC Lipson Neilson Cole Seltzer & Garin, P.C. Kehoe & Associates Eighth District Court Clerk Angie Calvillo, Court Recorder

1 Given this order, we take no action on the notice of failure to pay transcript fees filed on May 16, 2016.

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A )4gip9
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Docket ID: FEMA-2014-0033; OMB No. 1660-0132]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice; correction.

                    On November 19, 2014, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published an agency information collection notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     at 79 FR 68896. In the                     **ADDRESSES**                     section, FEMA inadvertently listed the docket ID in (1)                     *Online*                     as FEMA-2014-XXXX. The correct Docket ID is FEMA 2014-0033.                

Dated: November 24, 2014.

Charlene D. Myrthil,

Director, Records Management Division, Mission Support Bureau, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.

[FR Doc. 2014-28129 Filed 11-26-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-53-P
**Exhibit 32**

**TIME AMERICA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Time America, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Thomas S. Bednarik, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Thomas J. Klitzke, Vice President - Finance and Administration and Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, each hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.
| By:    |   | /s/ Thomas S. Bednarik                                                        |   |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Thomas S. Bednarik                                                            |
|   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer                                         |
|   |   | November 14, 2006                                                             |
|   |   |                                                                          |
| By:    |   | /s/ Thomas J. Klitzke                                                         |   |
|   |   | Thomas J. Klitzke                                                             |
|   |   | Vice President - Finance and Administration and  Principal Accounting Officer |
|   |   | November 14, 2006                                                             |

 

----
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.53

                             SOLO SERVE CORPORATION
                 SECOND AMENDMENT TO DIRECTOR STOCK OPTION PLAN

     This Second Amendment to the Solo Serve Corporation Director Stock Option
Plan is dated as of the 14th day of April, 1998.

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

     WHEREAS, Solo Serve Corporation, a Delaware Corporation (the "Company")
has previously adopted a Solo Serve Corporation Director Stock Option Plan (the
"Plan"); and

     Whereas, the Company desires to amend the Plan as set forth herein;

     NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended, effective as of the date
hereof, as follows:

     1.   Section 6(b) of the Plan is hereby amended to read, in its entirety,
     as follows:

          On September 1, 1995, each person who is, as of September 1, 1995, an
          Eligible Participant shall be granted an NSO to purchase 20,000 shares
          of Company Stock (the "Initial Formula Grants"). Each person who
          becomes an Eligible Participant on or after September 1, 1995 shall be
          granted, on the date such person becomes an Eligible Participant, an
          NSO to purchase 15,000 shares of Company Stock.

     2.   Section 7(d) of the Plan is hereby amended to read, in its entirety,
     as follows:

          Subject to the provisions of Section 13, Options granted pursuant to
          the Plan from and after April 14, 1998 shall become exercisable in
          three equal installments on each of the first three anniversaries of
          the date of grant and Initial Formula Grants granted pursuant to the
          Plan shall become exercisable according to the following schedule: (i)
          40% shall become exercisable six (6) months after the date of grant;
          (ii) 20% shall become exercisable on the first anniversary of the date
          of grant; (iii) 20% shall become exercisable on the second anniversary
          of the date of grant; and (iv) 20% shall become exercisable on the
          third anniversary of the date of grant; provided, however, that the
          Participant remains an Eligible Participant at said vesting dates, and
          except as otherwise set forth in the Option Agreement, no Options may
          be exercised after the expiration of ninety (90) days from the date a
          Participant ceases to be an Eligible Participant.

     3.   All other terms and conditions of the Plan shall remain in full force
     and effect.