alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SUBROUTINE LOGPPF(P,PPF)
C
C     PURPOSE--THIS SUBROUTINE COMPUTES THE PERCENT POINT
C              FUNCTION VALUE FOR THE LOGISTIC DISTRIBUTION 
C              WITH MEAN = 0 AND STANDARD DEVIATION = PI/SQRT(3).
C              THIS DISTRIBUTION IS DEFINED FOR ALL X AND HAS
C              THE PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION
C              F(X) = EXP(X)/(1+EXP(X)).
C              NOTE THAT THE PERCENT POINT FUNCTION OF A DISTRIBUTION 
C              IS IDENTICALLY THE SAME AS THE INVERSE CUMULATIVE
C              DISTRIBUTION FUNCTION OF THE DISTRIBUTION.
C     INPUT  ARGUMENTS--P      = THE SINGLE PRECISION VALUE 
C                                (BETWEEN 0.0 AND 1.0)
C                                AT WHICH THE PERCENT POINT 
C                                FUNCTION IS TO BE EVALUATED.
C     OUTPUT ARGUMENTS--PPF    = THE SINGLE PRECISION PERCENT
C                                POINT FUNCTION VALUE.
C     OUTPUT--THE SINGLE PRECISION PERCENT POINT
C             FUNCTION VALUE PPF.
C     PRINTING--NONE UNLESS AN INPUT ARGUMENT ERROR CONDITION EXISTS. 
C     RESTRICTIONS--P SHOULD BE BETWEEN 0.0 AND 1.0, EXCLUSIVELY.
C     OTHER DATAPAC   SUBROUTINES NEEDED--NONE.
C     FORTRAN LIBRARY SUBROUTINES NEEDED--EXP.
C     MODE OF INTERNAL OPERATIONS--SINGLE PRECISION.
C     LANGUAGE--ANSI FORTRAN. 
C     REFERENCES--FILLIBEN, SIMPLE AND ROBUST LINEAR ESTIMATION
C                 OF THE LOCATION PARAMETER OF A SYMMETRIC
C                 DISTRIBUTION (UNPUBLISHED PH.D. DISSERTATION,
C                 PRINCETON UNIVERSITY), 1969, PAGES 21-44, 229-231.
C               --FILLIBEN, 'THE PERCENT POINT FUNCTION',
C                 (UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPT), 1970, PAGES 28-31.
C               --JOHNSON AND KOTZ, CONTINUOUS UNIVARIATE
C                 DISTRIBUTIONS--2, 1970, PAGES 1-21.
C     WRITTEN BY--JAMES J. FILLIBEN
C                 STATISTICAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY (205.03)
C                 NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS
C                 WASHINGTON, D. C. 20234
C                 PHONE:  301-921-2315
C     ORIGINAL VERSION--JUNE      1972. 
C     UPDATED         --SEPTEMBER 1975. 
C     UPDATED         --NOVEMBER  1975. 
C
C---------------------------------------------------------------------
C
      IPR=6
C
C     CHECK THE INPUT ARGUMENTS FOR ERRORS
C
      IF(P.LE.0.0.OR.P.GE.1.0)GOTO50
      GOTO90
   50 WRITE(IPR,1)
      WRITE(IPR,46)P
      RETURN
   90 CONTINUE
    1 FORMAT(1H ,115H***** FATAL ERROR--THE FIRST  INPUT ARGUMENT TO THE
     1 LOGPPF SUBROUTINE IS OUTSIDE THE ALLOWABLE (0,1) INTERVAL *****)
   46 FORMAT(1H , 35H***** THE VALUE OF THE ARGUMENT IS ,E15.8,6H *****)
C
C-----START POINT-----------------------------------------------------
C
CCCCC CALL QCORR(P,Q)
CCCCC PPF=ALOG(P/Q) 
      PPF=ALOG(P/(1.0-P))
C
      RETURN
      END
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 10.1



Crawford Logo
Thomas W. Crawford
President & CEO


November 22, 2005



TO:      Allen W. Nelson
         General Counsel and Corporate Secretary

FROM:    Thomas W. Crawford             /s/ Thomas W. Crawford
         President & CEO


RE:      TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT

The following serves to summarize the terms applicable in the event your
employment with Crawford should be terminated for reasons other than "cause", or
in the event of a "change-in-control" of the company, both as solely defined by
the Chief Executive Officer.

In such event, the Company agrees that:

         A.       You will be paid a lump sum amount as severance compensation
                  equal to one year of your then current base salary, subject to
                  all appropriate taxes, payable as soon as is practicable
                  following the termination of employment or change-in-control;
         B.       You will be provided continuation of eligible medical
                  benefits, for a period of one year, under COBRA, at Company
                  expense; and
         C.       All incentive stock options granted to you will be deemed
                  vested and may be exercised within ninety (90) days following
                  the date of termination.

This Agreement is subject to execution by you and the Company of an agreement
achieving mutually acceptable terms on matters pertaining to:

         -        return of all Crawford property, documents, or instruments;
         -        no admission of liability on the part of Crawford;
         -        general release to any claims;
         -        non-disclosure of the arrangements;
         -        non-solicitation of employees and customers;
         -        cooperation; and
         -        non-disparagement

I request you confirm this agreement with your signature.



/s/ Allen W. Nelson                     22 Nov. 2005
Signature                               Date
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

 No. 07-6725 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RIGOBERTO MUNOZ PICAZ,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior

District Judge. (5:03-cr-00201)

Submitted: October 18, 2007 Decided: October 24, 2007

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rigoberto Munoz Picaz, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,

Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Rigoberto Munoz Picaz appeals the district court’s order

denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Picaz,

No. 5:03-cr-00201 (E.D.N.C. Apr. 2, 2007). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
|   | 3) | the                  Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or                  15(d) of                  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 4) | the                  information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of                  the                  Company. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                           |   |   |                                                 |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
| Dated:                  November 14, 2007 |   |   | /s/                LOWELL W.                GIFFHORN |
|                                           |   |   | Lowell                W. Giffhorn                    |
|                                           |   |   | Chief Financial Officer                              |

----
EXHIBIT
      32.2







**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 Quarterly Report of Magnitude Information Systems, Inc.
      (the
      "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (the "Form 10-Q"),
      I, Joerg H. Klaube, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, as of
      the
      date hereof, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my **** knowledge,
      that the Company's Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
      contained in the Form 10-Q, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:
                August 17, 2008
            /s/
            Joerg
                H. KlaubeJoerg
                H. Klaube, Chief Financial Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-41018

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JESUS OMAR CASTILLO-LUCIO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:14-CR-904-1

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jesus Omar 

Castillo-Lucio has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in 

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States 

v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Castillo-Lucio has not filed a response. 

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record 

reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 12, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-41018 Document: 00513379690 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/12/2016
No. 15-41018

2

presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s 

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 15-41018 Document: 00513379690 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/12/2016
10783.

#### Gibson & DeJournette *v.*Graham.

Decided November 19, 1919.

Complaint; from city coart of Floyd coanty—Judge Nunnally. Jane 5, 1919.

*Wright Willingham, L. H.*Covington, for plaintiff.

*Denny & Wright,*fox defendant.

Smith, J.

Gibson & DeJournette sued S. L. Graham upon his written assumption of a debt duo by King & Graham, a corporation; the writing relied upon as the basis of the suit being as follows: “Rome, Ga., June 20, 1918. Messrs. Gibson & DeJournette, Rome, Ga. Gentlemen: In reference to the bill of King & Graham, following my conversation with your Mr. DeJournette, beg to advise I will be personally responsible for same and see it is paid by July 15th. Very truly, [Signed] S. L. Graham.” At the conclusion of the evidence introduced in behalf of the plaintiff the court directed a verdict in favor of the defendant. *Held:*

1. “A writing relied on to satisfy that provision of the statute of frauds which requires a promise to pay the debt of another to be in writing must either itself or in connection with other writings identify the debt which is the subject of the promise, without the aid of parol evidence.” *Pearce*v. *Stone Tobacco Co.,*125 *Ga.*444 (54 S. E. 103). See also *Fields*v. *Bullington,*20 *Ga. App.*102 (3) (92 S. E. 653).

2. The writing relied upon in the instant case, as a promise by the defendant to pay the debt of the corporation, failing altogether to identify the indebtedness sued upon, and there being no other writing introduced in evidence to supply this defect, the court did not err in directing a verdict for the defendant.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         122,431
<SECURITIES>                                12,489,655
<RECEIVABLES>                                  385,360
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                30,306
<PP&E>                                       4,136,990
<DEPRECIATION>                                 811,098
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,353,644
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          426,589
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,927,055
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,353,644
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                54,097
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  232,778
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                308,319
<INCOME-TAX>                                   308,319
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            308,319
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   308,319
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      0.2
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk November 22, 2010

s1115 

# Order

November 22, 2010

141466

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 141466 COA: 297404 Oakland CC: 2008-219261-FH RONNIE WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to ap peal the May 27, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Lease Amendment



 Exhibit 10.13.1 
  
 LEASE AMENDMENT 
  
 Global Finance & Investment Co., Inc. 
 2623 2nd Avenue 
 Seattle, WA 98121 
  
 This amendment shall be effective as of December 1, 2005, and shall modify that certain Lease dated May 1, 2005 (the “Lease”), by and between Global
Finance & Investment Co., Inc. (“Landlord”) and Nighthawk Radiology Services, LLC (“Tenant”). Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Lease. 
  
 For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows: 
  

	 	1.	PREMISES: Section 1 of the Lease is hereby deleted and replaced in its entirety with the following: 

  
 “1. Premises to be Leased. Landlord agrees to Lease to Tenant the premises known as and located at the
following address: 
  
 Coeur d’Alene North Building

  
 Commercial Space 201, 202, 203, 205, 206, 207 &
210 
  
 250 Northwest Blvd. 
  
 Coeur d’Alene, ID 83014 
  

	 	2.	TERM OF LEASE: Section 2 of the Lease is hereby deleted and replaced in its entirety with the following: 

  
 “2. Term of Lease. This Lease shall begin at 12:01 a.m. on
December 1, 2005 and end on September 30, 2006 at 12:00 p.m. During the term of the Lease, Tenant shall pay Fourteen Thousand Two Hundred Dollars and zero cents ($14,200.00) per month during the Lease all as rent to the Landlord. Rent
shall be due on the first day of each month through the term of this Lease.” 
  

	 	3.	TERMINATION: Section 11 of the Lease is hereby terminated and replaced in its entirety with the following: 

  
 “11. Termination. Tenant must give Landlord four
(4) months notice prior to vacating Suite 201, 202, 203, 205, 206, 207 & 210. Therefore, notice must be given on or before May 31, 2006 if Tenant intends to vacate premises on September 30, 2006. If Tenant gives notice
to vacate after May 31, 2006, the ending term of the Lease shall be the later of September 30, 2006 or four (4) months after written Tenant notice to vacate is received by Landlord. 








	 	4.	All other terms, conditions, and covenants of the Lease shall remain and are hereby reaffirmed. 

  

							
	 By:
  
 /s/    Gary Lundgren
	 	 	 	dated	 	November 9, 2005
	Gary Lundgren-LANDLORD	 	 	 	 	 	 
				
	 By:
  
 /s/    Paul Cartee
	 	 	 	dated	 	November 9, 2005
	Nighthawk Radiology-TENANT
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                            6408
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    10254
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (245)
<INVENTORY>                                       4685
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 22900
<PP&E>                                           25324
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (20859)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   27835
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             7813
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                       1324
<COMMON>                                         99778
<OTHER-SE>                                     (81090)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     27835
<SALES>                                          27312
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 27312
<CGS>                                            22554
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    55811
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (404)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (28903)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (28903)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (30806)<F1>
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.79)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.79)
<FN>
<F1>Deemed dividends on preferred stock (1903)
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### H. G. Bidwell and Wife *v. A.*B. Rowe and Wife.

Deeds — Joint Tenancy of Widow and Children.

W'bere a conveyance was made to a widow as tbe wife of tbe deceased husband, it was held that sbe took as an ordinary grantee, and not as a widow, and can claim under the deed only a© joint tenant with her children.

*369APPEAL FROM OHIO 'CIRCUIT COURT.

January 21, 1873.

*Wintersmith, for appellants,*

*McHenry, for appellees.*

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

As Bidwell and wife refuse to abide by the division of the lands by which Mrs. Rowe and the two brothers were to take the home farm of 200 acres and pay a difference of $500 and insist on having their full interest allotted them, they were properly required to refund the $83 paid them under the agreement.

And as they will not comply with their contract to allow Thomas an advantage of $1,000 in the division of the lands to compensate him for taking care of the “old folks,” the court properly required them to comply with their contract by paying their proportion of the $1,000 in money.

The court had full power and acted properly in refusing to annul the contract, although they could not be compelled to surrender title to their land.

We are, however, of opinion that the court was in error in holding that Mrs. Rowe owned in fee one-third of the 226 acres conveyed to her and her children by Brown and wife. This deed was executed after the adoption of the Revised Statutes, and not under such a state of case as raised a resulting trust in her favor on account of the payments made by her for the land.

By the plain language of the deed she can not hold in fee more ■than one-sixth of the land. It is insisted that as the conveyance was made to her as the wife of Robert Render, deceased, she takes as widow and not as an ordinary grantee. We do not concur in this conclusion, but are satisfied that she can claim under the deed only as a joint tenant with her children. For this reason the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for a partition of the lands allotted to Mrs. Rowe and the appellants upon this basis, instead of that adopted by the circuit court.

The court properly refused to disturb the allotment as to the remaining children.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4296 

To reauthorize and revise the Child Care Access Means Parents in School 

Program (CCAMPIS). 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 5, 2004 

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

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To reauthorize and revise the Child Care Access Means 

Parents in School Program (CCAMPIS). 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘21st Century CAMPIS 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION AND REVISION OF CCAMPIS. 

7 (a) MINIMUM GRANT.—Section 419N(b)(2)(B) of the 

8 Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 

9 1070e(b)(2)(B)) is amended by striking ‘‘$10,000’’ and 

10 inserting ‘‘$30,000’’. 
2 

•HR 4296 IH 

1 (b) ELIGIBLE INSTITUTIONS.—Section 419N(b)(4) 

2 of such Act is amended by striking ‘‘$350,000’’ and in3 serting ‘‘$250,000’’. 

4 (c) DEFINITION OF LOW INCOME STUDENT.—Sec5 tion 419N(b)(7) of such Act is amended by striking ‘‘a 

6 student who is eligible to receive’’ and inserting ‘‘a student 

7 whose family income makes the student eligible to re8 ceive’’. 

9 (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

10 419N(g) of such Act is amended— 

11 (1) by striking ‘‘$45,000,000’’ and inserting 

12 ‘‘$75,000,000’’; 

13 (2) by striking ‘‘1999’’ and inserting ‘‘2005’’; 

14 and 

15 (3) by striking ‘‘4 succeeding’’ and inserting ‘‘5 

16 succeeding’’. 

Æ