alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.16
                                                                         Summary

Summary of Loan  Agreement by and between  Shenzhen BAK Battery Co., Ltd.  ("the
Company") and Longgang  Branch,  Agricultural  Bank of China dated  November 30,
2005.

Main contents:
>>    Contract No. (Shenzhen Longgang) Nong Yin Jie Zi (81101200500001810)
>>    Loan Amount (RMB) 16 million yuan
>>    Contract Term: November 30, 2005 ~ May 30, 2005
>>    Interest rate: fixed rate of 5.22%;
            |X|   Penalty  interest rate for delayed  repayment:  5.22% plus 50%
                  *5.22%;
            |X|   Penalty interest rate for embezzlement of loan proceeds: 5.22%
                  * 2;
>>    Purpose of the loan is to provide  working  capital for the Company to buy
      raw material;
>>    Advanced repayment of loan needs to be approved by the Lender;
>>    Breach  of  contract  penalties:  suspension  of loan  unprovided,  demand
      prepayment of loan principal and interest before  maturity;  imposition of
      punitive interest;  compensation for the Lender's expenses incurred due to
      the Company's breach of contract such as lawyer's fee, travel cost in case
      of litigation, etc.
>>    The Loan agreement is under  Comprehensive  Credit  Facility  Agreement Of
      Maximum Amount entered between the Company and Agricultural Bank (Shenzhen
      Longgang Nongyin Shouzi No.200502370001;
>>    The loan  agreement is guaranteed by Guaranty  Contract of Maximum  Amount
      entered between BAK International Limited ("BAK HK") and Agricultural Bank
      (Shenzhen  Longgang  Nongyin  Gaobaozi   81905200500000068)  and  Guaranty
      Contract of Maximum Amount entered  between Li Xiangqian and  Agricultural
      Bank (Shenzhen Longgang Nongyin Gaobaozi 200502379999).

Summary of the articles omitted
>>    Types of the loan
>>    Clearing of the loan interest
>>    Condition precedent to drawing of the loan
>>    Rights and obligations of the borrower
>>    Rights and obligations of the lender
>>    Guarantee of the loan
>>    Dispute settlement
>>    Miscellaneous
>>    Validity
>>    Notes
May 30, 2013



### JUDGMENT


## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

VICTORIA V. OCHSNER , Appellant

NO. 14

- 11

- 01081

- CV V.

PRESTON A. OCHSNER , Appellee

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appel lee, Preston A. Ochsner, signed October 26, 2011, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED

. We order appellant, Victoria V. Ochsner to pay all costs incurred in this appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 479 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 479

 To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize Army arsenals to 
 undertake to fulfill orders or contracts for articles or services in 
     advance of the receipt of payment under certain circumstances.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 29, 2003

 Mr. McNulty introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize Army arsenals to 
 undertake to fulfill orders or contracts for articles or services in 
     advance of the receipt of payment under certain circumstances.

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

SECTION 1. PERFORMANCE OF ORDERS FOR ARTICLES OR SERVICES BY ARMY 
              ARSENALS BEFORE RECEIPT OF PAYMENT.

    (a) Authority.--(1) Chapter 433 of title 10, United States Code, is 
amended by inserting after section 4541 the following new section:
``Sec. 4541a. Army arsenals: performance before receipt of payment
    ``(a) Authority.--Regulations under section 2208(h) of this title 
shall authorize the Army arsenals to undertake, with working-capital 
funds, to fulfill orders or contracts of customers referred to in 
subsection (b) for articles or services in advance of the receipt of 
payment for the articles or services.
    ``(b) Transactions to Which Applicable.--The authority provided in 
subsection (a) applies with respect to an order or contract for 
articles or services that is placed or entered into, respectively, with 
an arsenal by a customer that--
            ``(1) is--
                    ``(A) a department or agency of the United States;
                    ``(B) a person using the articles or services in 
                fulfillment of a contract of a department or agency of 
                the United States; or
                    ``(C) a person supplying the articles or services 
                to a foreign government under sections 22, 23, and 24 
                of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2762, 2763, 
                2764); and
            ``(2) is eligible under any other provision of law to 
        obtain the articles or services from the arsenal.''.
    (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is 
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 4541 the 
following new item:

``4541a. Army arsenals: performance before receipt of payment.''.
    (b) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe the 
regulations to carry out section 4541a of title 10, United States Code 
(as added by subsection (a)), not later than 60 days after the date of 
the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER W ITHDRAWING M EDIATION O RDER

Appellate case name: Union Pacific Railroad Company v. In the Estate of Geronimo,

Gutierrez, deceased and Amelia Gutierrez and Adrian Gutierrez,

Individually in their Capacities as Dependents of Geronimo Gutierrez,

deceased and Amelia Gutierrez, in her capacity as Administratrix of

the Estate of Geronimo Guti

Appellate case number: 01

- 12

- 01029

- CV

Date motion filed: December 17, 2012

Type of Motion: Objectio n to Mediation

Party filing motion: Appellee

Trial court case number: 380337401

Trial court: Co Civil Ct at Law No 4 of Harris County



### It is ORDERED that Appellee’s objection to mediation is granted. We withdraw

our Mediation Order dated November 30, 2 012.

Judge’s signature: /s/ James P. Sharp, Jr.

X Acting individually

Date: December 1 8 , 2012 i

i Absent emergency or a statement that the motion is unopposed, must wait ten days before acting on motio n except for

motion to extend time to file a brief. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 10.3(a).

Note : Single justice may grant or deny any request for relief properly sought by motion, except in a civil case a single justice

should not: (1) act on a petition for an extr aordinary writ or (2) dismiss or otherwise determine an appeal or a motion

for rehearing. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 10.4(a).
United States Department of Commerce

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Certificate of Metrological Traceability For:

Oklahoma

2022

This laboratory has demonstrated evidence of an unbroken chain of metrological traceability of its standards to the international 

system of units (SI), maintains a documented calibration program, documented measurement uncertainties, uses documented 

measurement procedures, successfully completed training and proficiency tests, submitted a quality management system, and 

has demonstrated suitable measurement assurance for the Scope listed on this certificate.

The Office of Weights and Measures Program assesses laboratories to NIST Handbook 143 - Program Handbook for State 

Weights and Measures Laboratories and ISO/IEC 17025:2017. 

Scope

Note: CONDITIONAL status in 

effect due to requirements for laboratory staff training.

Mass Echelon III

3000 kg to 1 mg

6000 lb to 0.001 lb

100 oz to 0.005 oz

20 oz t to 1 oz t

Weight Carts 

5500 lb to 2000 lb

Volume Transfer, II

375 gal to 5 gal

_____________________________________

Katrice Lippa, Chief

NIST Office of Weights and Measures

(Rev.: September 2021)

Effective Dates: 2022-02-01 to 2023-02-01
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-15-0000329

19-MAR-2019

08:33 AM
J. 

his proceedings." See generally Means v. State, 120 Nev. 1001, 1012, 103 

P.3d 25, 33 (2004) (holding that a petitioner has the burden of establishing 

facts underlying his claims by a preponderance of the evidence). The 

district court also determined that Ibold failed to demonstrate that 

counsel's representation was deficient and prejudice. See Hill v. Lockhart, 

474 U.S. 52, 58-59 (1985); Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 

694 (1984); Kirksey v. State, 112 Nev. 980, 987, 923 P.2d 1102, 1107 

(1996); see also Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. 131 S. Ct. 1388, 

1408 (2011) ("Surmounting Strickland's high bar is never an easy task." 

(quotation marks omitted) (alteration omitted)). We conclude that the 

district court did not err by rejecting Ibold's ineffective-assistance claim. 

Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2 

Hardesty 

ca-c; J. 

Douglas 

2The fast track statement does not comply with NRAP 3C(h)(1) and 

NRAP 32(a)(4) because the text in the body of the briefs is not doublespaced. Counsel for Ibold is cautioned that the failure to comply with the 

briefing requirements in the future may result in the imposition of 

sanctions. See NRAP 3C(n). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A ce: 
cc: Chief Judge, The Tenth Judicial District 

Hon. Robert E. Estes, Senior Judge 

The Law Office of Jacob N. Sommer 

Churchill County District Attorney/Fallon 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Churchill County Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 3 

(0) 1947A (e144
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-20425

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PHILLIP RAY WATKINS,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the

Southern District of Texas

(CR-H-95-301)

January 16, 1997

Before JOHNSON, GARWOOD, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Phillip Ray Watkins appeals his conviction of conspiracy to

possess with intent to distribute crack cocaine and aiding and

abetting the possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute.

Watkins contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his

conviction. 

In reviewing the sufficiency of evidence to support a

conviction, the Court “must determine whether viewing the evidence
2

and inferences therefrom ‘in a light most favorable to the jury’s

guilty verdict[], a rational trier of fact could have found [the]

defendant[] guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.’” United States v.

Payne, 99 F.3d 1273, 1278 (5th Cir. 1996)(quoting United States v.

Velgar-Vivero, 8 F.3d 236, 239 (5th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114

S. Ct. 1865 (1994)). Circumstantial evidence alone may prove the

existence of a conspiracy. United States v. Dean, 59 F.3d 1479,

1485 (5th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 747 (1996). Some

circumstances, if considered individually, may be insufficient to

establish guilt; however, those same circumstances, if considered

collectively, could be sufficient evidence of guilt. See United

States v. Lechuga, 888 F.2d 1472, 1476 (5th Cir. 1989).

Thus, after thoroughly reviewing the record in the present

case, we hold that the evidence is sufficient for a reasonable jury

to find Watkins guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. 

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32(a)

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

In connection  with the Annual  Report of DRYCLEAN USA, Inc. (the  "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Michael S. Steiner,
Principal  Executive  Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002 that, to the best of my knowledge:

     (1)  The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
     (2)  The  information  contained  in the  report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of the Company.

September 29, 2003

                                             /s/ Michael S. Steiner
                                             ----------------------------------
                                             Michael S. Steiner
                                             President and Principal
                                             Executive Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

ADAM RENFROE, JR.,

Petitioner

v.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, 

BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 194 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 6th day of August, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Physics and Pattern Evidence

Scientific Area Committee

Chair: Austin Hicklin, Noblis

February 2016
Physics/Pattern SAC - Subcommittees

2

• Firearms & Toolmarks

o Chair: Andy Smith, San Francisco Police 

Department Crime Lab 

• Footwear and Tire

o Chair: Matt Johnson, Orange County Sheriff's 

Dept Crime Lab 

• Friction Ridge

o Chair: Melissa Gische, FBI Laboratory 

• Questioned Documents

o Chair: Rigo Vargas, Mississippi Forensic 

Laboratory 

• Bloodstain Pattern Analysis

o Chair: Toby Wolson, Miami-Dade Police Dept. 

Forensic Services Bureau (retired)
Physics/Pattern SAC: Purpose

3

• To foster the development of rigorous standards and 

guidelines within and across the pattern disciplines

• To assist in the adoption of these standards and 

guidelines

• To encourage enforcement of these standards and 

guidelines through accreditation, certification, and 

training

• To encourage evaluations to test and validate 

procedures

• To encourage research to improve the disciplines

• To enhance the rigor of these disciplines through 

transparent, accurate, and reliable processes
Goals for standards and guidelines

4

• Standards and guidelines need to be practical: to be as rigorous as 

practical given current capabilities 

BUT 

• OSAC also needs to recommend research to continually improve the 

disciplines in these areas

• Terminology and conclusions: consistent across disciplines

• Procedures: as quantitative and objective as practical 

• Documentation: complete and transparent

• Reporting and Testimony

o include all data on which conclusions are based

o distinguish data, conclusions, and opinions

o clearly state the limitations and caveats of conclusions

o clearly specify the bases of opinions
Physics/Pattern SAC: Current Priorities

5

• Coordination across disciplines in these areas:

o Conclusions

• Developing multi-discipline “Standard for Source Conclusions” document

o Terminology

o Research Needs
Comments or questions?

Austin Hicklin

hicklin@noblis.org

6
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4807 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4807

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 140 Sacramento Street in Rio Vista, California, as the ``Adam G. 
                     Kinser Post Office Building''.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4807

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 140 Sacramento Street in Rio Vista, California, as the ``Adam G. 
                     Kinser 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 140 
Sacramento Street in Rio Vista, California, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Adam G. Kinser 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 ``Adam G. Kinser Post Office 
Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 6, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Exhibit 32.2

                            MICROPAC INDUSTRIES, INC.

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

In  connection  with  the  Annual  Report  of  Micropac  Industries,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending  November 30, 2007 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Patrick Cefalu, CFO of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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


 /s/ Patrick Cefalu
----------------------
Patrick Cefalu, CFO
(Principal Financial Officer)
EX-10.III.A.15



 






	 	 	 	 	 



EXHIBIT
10(iii)(A) 15




SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION TERMS

FOR

NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS



The following is a summary of compensation arrangements for non-employee directors for 2006.



For 2006, each non-employee director’s annual retainer will be $165,000. The Chairman of the
Audit and Finance Committee will receive an additional retainer of $25,000, and the Chairman of
each of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and the Leadership Development and
Compensation Committee will receive an additional retainer of $15,000. Each of the other members
of the Audit and Finance Committee will receive an additional annual retainer of $5,000. In fiscal
2006, the lead director will receive an additional $50,000. At least 50% of all retainers and fees
must be taken in common stock, and amounts not paid in common stock will be paid in cash.
Frequency RX Tone TX Tone Name Lat Long

Air Tactics 167.9500 167.9500 Bridge Dip 39° 39.87 121°31.24

Air /Air Rotary 123.1750 123.1750 Island Dip 39° 39.73 121°29.70

Air /Air Briefing Paradise Dip 39° 51.26 121°34.56

A/G - Command 159.3450 192.8(16) 159.3450 192.8(16) Dam Check 39° 32.99 121°29.32

A/G - Tactics 159.2775 192.8(16) 159.2725 192.8(16) Powerhouse Check 39° 49.51 121°24.59

Command 154.4150 123.0(2) 159.0000 See 205

TOLC 122.8000 122.8000

DECK 163.1000 163.1000

Calcord 156.0750 156.7 (6) 156.0750 156.7 (6)

Air Guard 168.6250 168.6250 110.9 (1)

***Verify With ICS 220***
From: Marshall.Toburen@rsa.com <Marshall.Toburen@rsa.com>

Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 5:25 PM

To: privacyframework <privacyframework@nist.gov>

Subject: Privacy Framework Feedback

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the most recent iteration of the NIST Privacy Framework. My comment is 

attached.

Marshall Toburen

Risk Strategist, Risk Management Solutions | RSA, a Dell Technologies Business

o: 913.549.1521 | m: 913.370.6659

marshall.toburen@rsa.com
Comment 

#

Organization 

Name

Submitted By 

(Name/Email)

Page 

#

Line 

# Section

Comment

(Include rationale for comment) Suggested Change

Type of 

Comment 

(General/Editorial

/Technical)

1 RSA Marshall Toburen / 

marshall.toburen@

rsa.com

42 950 [3] Footnote [3] links to a PRAM. Looking 

at the "Prioritizing Risk.xlsx" workbook 

contained in the PRAM, the worksheet 

"Prioritizing Risk.xlsx" only provides an 

example of assessing the impact of 

privacy risk from the perspective of 

impact to the organization. The 

guidance on the worksheet and in the 

Privacy Framework are clear that the 

privacy risk assessment should, if 

possible, be performed from the 

perspective of the individual. Since 

that is the guidance, the example 

impact assessment in this PRAM 

workbook should include an 

assessment of impact on the individual. 

I am concerned that if you leave the 

example PRAM impact risk assessment 

as it is, organizations embracing the 

Privacy Framework may adopt the 

example PRAM without questioning 

whether the methodology should be 

enhanced to assess the impact to the 

individual. In many scenarios, the 

impact to the organization alone is not 

an accurate proxy of impact to 

individuals.

The example privacy 

impact assessment 

contained in the 

"Prioritizing 

Risk.xlsx" of the 

PRAM referenced in 

footnote [3] should 

be expanded and 

incorporate columns 

for rating the impact 

of the Potential 

Problems for 

Individuals. In this 

way the example 

will incorporate a 

privacy impact 

assessment from 

both individuals and 

the organization's 

perspective and 

effectively challenge 

and encourage 

practitioners to try 

and perform privacy 

risk assessments 

from the 

perspective of 

individuals, where 

practical.

Technical
Certificate of Trust of BNSF Funding Trust 1



 Exhibit 4.3 
  

CERTIFICATE OF TRUST 
  
 OF 
  
 BNSF FUNDING TRUST I 
  
 This Certificate of Trust of BNSF Funding Trust I (the “Trust”) is being duly executed and filed by the undersigned, as trustees, to form a
statutory trust under the Delaware Statutory Trust Act (12 Del. C. §3801 et seq.) (the “Act”). 
  
 1. Name. The name of the statutory trust being formed hereby is BNSF Funding Trust I. 
  
 2. Delaware Trustee. The name and business address of the trustee of
the Trust with a principal place of business in the State of Delaware are U.S. Bank Trust National Association, 300 East Delaware Avenue, 8th Floor, Wilmington, Delaware 19801. 
  
 3. Effective Date. This Certificate of Trust shall be effective upon filing. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being the trustees of the Trust, have executed this Certificate of Trust in accordance with Section 3811(a) of the Act. 
  

			
	 U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee

		
	 By:
	 	  


	 Name:
	 	 Michael M. Hopkins

	 Title:
	 	 Vice President

	
	 Linda Hurt, as Trustee

		
	 By:
	 	  


	
	 James Gallegos, as Trustee

		
	 By: