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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-03-1999
<CASH>                                              80
<SECURITIES>                                         3
<RECEIVABLES>                                      320
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        896
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           1,774
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (808)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,447
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              117
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,798)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,447
<SALES>                                            729
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   729
<CGS>                                              596
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      596
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   218
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    10
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  15
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (110)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (110)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       4
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (106)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.87)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.15)
        

</TABLE>
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 5135

_____________________________
B ERNADETTE G. W OLFF ,
Petitioner
,

v.

C HARLES L. W OLFF , Respondent

.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Certiorari

— Original Jurisdiction.

July 31, 2018

P ER C URIAM

. The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits

. W ETHERELL , R AY , and O STERHAUS , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Crystal C. Spencer, Spencer Law, P.A., Pensacola
, for Petitioner

.2 No appearance for Respon dent

.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
<ARTICLE>                                                           5 

        
<S>                                                       <C> 
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                  12-MOS 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                         FEB-28-1994 
<PERIOD-START>                                            MAR-01-1993 
<PERIOD-END>                                              FEB-28-1994 
<CASH>                                                              0 
<SECURITIES>                                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                       0 
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                                         0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                    0 
<PP&E>                                                              0 
<DEPRECIATION>                                                      0 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                      0 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                         768,912 
<BONDS>                                                             0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0 
<PREFERRED>                                                         0 
<COMMON>                                                       50,000
<OTHER-SE>                                                  1,141,299
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                (768,912)
<SALES>                                                             0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                    0 
<CGS>                                                               0 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                    0 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                  0 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                     0
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        0 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     0
<CHANGES>                                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                                        0      
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                       0 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0 

         

</TABLE>
Exhibit 24

POWER OF ATTORNEY

Each of the undersigned directors of Medtronic, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, hereby
constitutes and appoints each of WILLIAM A. HAWKINS and TERRANCE L. CARLSON, acting individually or jointly, their true and
lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power to act for them and in their name, place and stead, in any and all capacities,
to do any and all acts and execute any and all documents which either such attorney and agent may deem necessary or desirable
to enable Medtronic, Inc. to comply with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and any rules, regulations and requirements
of the Securities and Exchange Commission in respect thereof, in connection with the filing with the Commission of Medtronics
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 25, 2008, including specifically, but without limiting the
generality of the foregoing, power and authority to sign the names of the undersigned directors to the Form 10-K and to any
instruments and documents filed as part of or in connection with the Form 10-K or any amendments thereto; and the undersigned
hereby ratify and confirm all actions taken and documents signed by each said attorney and agent as provided herein.

The undersigned have set their hands this 19th day of June, 2008.

/s/ Richard H. Anderson
Richard H. Anderson

/s/ James T. Lenehan
James T. Lenehan/s/ David L. Calhoun
David L. Calhoun

/s/ Denise M. OLeary
Denise M. OLeary/s/ Arthur D. Collins, Jr.
Arthur D. Collins, Jr.

/s/ Kendal J. Powell
Kendall J. Powell/s/ Victor J. Dzau
Victor J. Dzau, M.D.

/s/ Robert C. Pozen
Robert C. Pozen/s/ William A. Hawkins
William A. Hawkins

/s/ Jean-Pierre Rosso
Jean-Pierre Rosso/s/ Shirley Ann Jackson
Shirley Ann Jackson, Ph.D.

/s/ Jack W. Schuler
Jack W. Schuler


---
10297.

#### Alexander *v.*The State.

Bloodworth, J.

1. The motion to dismiss the writ of error, on the ' ground that “The bill of exceptions was not tendered within twenty days after the overruling of the motion for a new trial,” is overruled. The bill of exceptions contains a recital that it was presented “within twenty days from the date of the order overruling the said motion for new trial.” “Where the bill of exceptions contains a recital that it was tendered within the time prescribed by law, the writ of error, will not be dismissed [on the ground that it was not tendered within that time], although it appears that the judge did not sign and certify the same within the statutory period, unless it be made to appear that his failure so to sign and certify was because of some act of the plaintiff or his counsel. Acts 1896, p. 45 [Civil Code (1910), § 6187]; *Moore*v. *Kelly & Jones Co.,*109 *Ga.*799 (35 S. E: 168).” *Harnage*v. *State,*7 *Ga. App.*573 (67 S. E. 694). See also *Strickland*v. *Brannen,*18 *Ga. App.*325 (89 S. E. 337), and cases cited.

2. The indictment in this case charged Felix Alexander with obstructing legal process, and alleged that he “did knowingly and wilfully obstruct and resist and oppose *J.*S. Blackwell, deputy sheriff of said county, an officer of said State, and a person duly-authorized in serving and executing and attempting to serve a lawful process and-order, to wit, a search warrant issued' by E. T. Portwood, J. P., of -said eounty, au- • thorizing and directing a search of the dwelling house and outhouses of said Felix Alexander.” To support the allegations of the indictment a certain search warrant was offered in evidence, in Which it appeared that the name “Felix Alexander,” originally written therein,' had been erased and the name “Hersehel Beasley” inserted in lieu.thereof. The ' record shows no evidence whatever in explanation of this' change, or that the paper had been altered since tlie sheriff attempted to execute it. On the contrary, the sheriff swore that “the search warrant was ■ at that time in same shape as-it now appears.” This being true, the evidence offered did not support the allegation in the indictment, and the court erred in allowing the search warrant to go to the jury. With*547out this evidence there was nothing to support the verdict. It is unnecessary to consider the remaining ground of the motion for a new trial.

Decided April 12, 1919.

Indictment for obstructing legal process; from Taliaferro superior court—Judge Walker. November 27, 1919.

*J. A. Beazley,*for plaintiff in error.

*R. C. Norman, solicitor-general,*contra.

*Judgement reversed.*

*Broyles, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.*
Letter Agreement dated December 7,2004



 EXHIBIT 10.4 
  

			
	 


	 	 Groton Laboratories
 Pfizer
Inc
 Eastern Point Road    MS 8200-30
 Groton, CT 06340
 Tel 860 441 1991 Fax 860 441 1738
 Email mark_della_porta@groton.pfizer.com

	 	  
 Global Research & Development

		
	 December 7, 2004
	 	 Mark P. DellaPorta
 Senior Director Site
Head, Groton
 Strategic Alliances


  
 Dr. Stephen J. McAndrew 
 Xenogen Biosciences 
 5 Cedar Brook Drive 
 Cranbury, New Jersey 08512 
  
 Dear
Dr. McAndrew, 
  
 Pursuant to Section 3.1(g) of the Collaborative
Research Agreement dated December 28, 2000 (“2000 Agreement”) and the Amending Letter dated December 26, 2003 (“Amending Letter”) between Pfizer Inc (“Pfizer”) and Xenogen Biosciences (“Xenogen
Cranbury”), Pfizer hereby exercises it’s option to extend the 2000 Agreement for one additional year. This Letter serves as notice of Pfizer’s exercise of the first extension only and while we note that there are three additional
extension options available to Pfizer to exercise in subsequent years. 
  
 All other terms and conditions of the 2000 Agreement and the Amending Letter shall remain unchanged and in full force. 
  
 Please have the appropriate official of Xenogen Cranbury sign both copies of this Agreement and return one original to 
 Kelly P. Longo at the above address. 
  
 Sincerely, 
  

	
	 /s/ Mark P. DellaPorta


	Mark P. DellaPorta
	Site Director
	Strategic Alliances

  
 Agreed: 
  
 Xenogen Biosciences, Inc. 
  

							
	By:	 	 /s/ Stephen J. McAndrew

	  	

	  	 
	Date:	 	12/10/04
H. R. 4222

One Hundred Eighth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the twentieth day of January, two thousand and four

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 550 Nebraska

Avenue in Kansas City, Kansas, as the ‘‘Newell George Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

550 Nebraska Avenue in Kansas City, Kansas, shall be known

and designated as the ‘‘Newell George Post Office Building’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Newell

George Post Office Building’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Kiran Patel, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of
Solectron Corporation on Form 10-Q for the three-month period ended May 28, 2004
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of Solectron Corporation.

Date: July 2, 2004

                                              /s/ Kiran Patel
                                              ---------------
                                              Kiran Patel
                                              Executive Vice President and Chief
                                              Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1

                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer
                         and Principal Financial Officer
                         Pursuant to Section 906 of the
                           Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with this annual report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June
30, 2005 ("Report") of Valley Forge Scientific Corp., I, Jerry L. Malis,
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Valley Forge
Scientific Corp., hereby certify that, to my knowledge:

     o    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or
          15 (d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; as
          amended, and

     o    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of Valley Forge Scientific Corp.


Date: August 15, 2005                    /s/ JERRY L. MALIS
                                         ---------------------------------
                                         Jerry L. Malis
                                         President,
                                         Chief Executive Officer, and
                                         Principal Financial Officer

     The foregoing certification is furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of the
Securities Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference
into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof,
regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.


                                      -39-
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

JORGE GONZALEZ, on behalf of himself )

and all other persons similarly situated, )

known and unknown, )

) Case No. 1:20-cv-04354

Plaintiff, )

) Judge Thomas M. Durkin

v. )

) Magistrate Judge Heather K. McShain

RICHELIEU FOODS, INC., )

) 

Defendant. )

PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR 

PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

For the reasons stated in his accompanying Memorandum of Law, Plaintiff, on behalf of 

himself and the settlement class he seeks to represent, moves this Court to grant preliminary 

approval of the proposed class action settlement and enter his proposed Preliminary Approval 

Order, which Plaintiff will email to the Court’s proposed order email address. Defendant does not 

oppose this motion.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: July 1, 2021

/s/Zachary C. Flowerree

One of Plaintiff’s Attorneys

Douglas M. Werman 

dwerman@flsalaw.com

Zachary C. Flowerree 

zflowerree@flsalaw.com

WERMAN SALAS P.C.

77 W. Washington Street, Suite 1402

Chicago, IL 60602

(312) 419-1008

Attorneys for Plaintiff and 

Others Similarly Situated

Case: 1:20-cv-04354 Document #: 26 Filed: 07/01/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:116
1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

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

was filed with the Court’s CM/ECF filing system on July 1, 2021, which will serve a copy on all 

counsel of record.

/s/ Zachary C. Flowerree

 One of the Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case: 1:20-cv-04354 Document #: 26 Filed: 07/01/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:117
**CERTIFICATION
      OF PERIODIC REPORT**




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Alpha Nutra,
      Inc.(the “Company”), certifies that:




1.  The
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended June 30,
      2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
      and




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







November
      13, 2006








By:
            /s/Mark
                L. Baum
              Mark
                L. Baum
              President
                and Chief Executive Officer





This
      certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject
      to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
      purpose.
#### THE STATE ex rel. WENNEKER, Collector, Appellant, v. BOYLE.

Division One,

May 25, 1904.

MO BILL OF EXCEPTIONS: Affirmance. In a suit for taxes, if there is no hill of exceptions, and appellant does not claim he is entitled to judgment on the face of the pleadings, there is 'nothing for the Supreme Court to review.

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Ho». *Warwick Hough,*Judge.

Affirmed.

*E. G. Slevin*for appellant.

*Geo. W. Easley*for respondent; *Boyle, Priest <& Lehmann*of counsel.

*696VALLIANT, J.

This is a suit to recover of defendant, who is alleged to be the curator *(sic)*of the will of George J. Plant, deceased, taxes for the year 1900, assessed against personal property of the value of $37,300, alleged to have been in the hands of defendant on June 1,1899.

The answer is a general denial and then a statement that the defendant had been executor of the will of George J. Plant, deceased, but thát on June 16, 1899, prior to the institution of the suit, he had made final settlement of the estate, and distributed it under order of the probate court, and had not since had anything belonging to the estate in his hands. There was no reply.

The record shows that when the cause came on for trial “at the close of plaintiff’s case, plaintiff elects to take a nonsuit with leave to move to set the same aside, ’ ’ and there was a judgment for defendant accordingly. The record also shows that a motion to set aside the nonsuit was filed and that it was overruled, then there was an appeal prayed and allowed. That is all that is shown by the record before us. Appellant does not claim that he is entitled to a judgment on the face of the pleadings, but asks a reversal on grounds that could be brought to our notice only through a bill of exceptions.

There is no bill of exceptions in the record; therefore, we do not know what evidence, if any, the plaintiff adduced, or why he took a nonsuit, or on what his motion to set aside the nonsuit was grounded, or to what action of the court, if any, he excepted. •

In that condition of the record there is nothing for us to review. The judgment is affirmed.

All concur, except *Robinson,*Jabsent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

June 14, 2024

SC-2023-0632

Ex parte Peter Capote. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO 

THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: Peter Capote v. State of 

Alabama) (Colbert Circuit Court: CC-16-340.60; Criminal Appeals: CR20-0537).

CERTIFICATE OF JUDGMENT

WHEREAS, the petition for writ of certiorari in the above 

referenced cause has been duly submitted and considered by the 

Supreme Court of Alabama and the judgment indicated below was 

entered in this cause on June 14, 2024:

Writ Denied. No Opinion. Stewart, J. -- Parker, C.J., and Shaw, 

Wise, Bryan, Sellers, Mendheim, Mitchell, and Cook, JJ., concur.

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Rule 41, Ala. R. App. P., IT IS 

HEREBY ORDERED that this Court's judgment in this cause is certified 

on this date. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, unless otherwise ordered 

by this Court or agreed upon by the parties, the costs of this cause are 

hereby taxed as provided by Rule 35, Ala. R. App. P.

I, Megan B. Rhodebeck, certify that this is the record of the judgment of the Court, witness 

my hand and seal.

Clerk, Supreme Court of Alabama
Third Amendment of Restricted Stock Award Agreement



 Exhibit 10.72.1 
  
 THIRD AMENDMENT OF 
 RESTRICTED STOCK AWARD AGREEMENTS 
  
 This Third
Amendment of Restricted Stock Award Agreements is between Path 1 Network Technologies Inc. (“Path 1”) and David Carnevale (“Carnevale”) as of September 23, 2005. It amends the Restricted Stock Award Agreement between the
parties dated October 23, 2003, as previously amended, and the Restricted Stock Award Agreement between the parties dated February 27, 2004, as previously amended (together, the “Agreements”). 
  
 Carnevale is Path 1’s Vice President. This Amendment is entered into in
anticipation of Carnevale’s resignation as Vice President and an employee. 
  
 1. A new Section 17 is added to each of the respective Agreements to read in full as follows: 
  
 17. Resignation. Notwithstanding anything in Section 3(b) or Section 16 to the contrary, in the event Carnevale resigns
as Vice President and an employee effective September 23, 2005, all the shares of Restricted Stock which have not already vested shall vest immediately on September 23, 2005, whether or not such day is within a “closed window
period,” and shall thereupon become Vested Stock; and thereupon the provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of Section 16 shall entirely cease to be effective. 
  
 2. Except as expressly amended by this Amendment, each of the respective Agreements remains unchanged and in full force and
effect. 
  
 3. The parties acknowledge that they have the right to
have been represented by legal counsel of their own choosing, and that Heller Ehrman LLP and Hayden Trubitt are representing Path 1 and are not representing Carnevale. 
  

			
	
	 /s/ David Carnevale

	 DAVID CARNEVALE

	
	 PATH 1 NETWORK TECHNOLOGIES INC.

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Frederick Cary

	 	 	 Frederick Cary, Director and Authorized Agent