alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES
                SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                     WASHINGTON, D.C.  20549

                           FORM 10-Q

            QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
              OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


           For the Quarter ended December 31, 1998

              Commission file number     33-24537


            CENTURY PACIFIC TAX CREDIT HOUSING FUND II
      (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)


          CALIFORNIA                       95-4178283
(State of other jurisdiction of            (IRS Employer
incorporation of organization)             Identification Number)


1925 Century Park East, Suite 1760
Los Angeles, CA                            90067
(Address of principal executive offices)   (Zip Code)


Registrant's telephone number, including area code:
(800) 262-8242


No Change
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year if changed
since last report)


Indicate by a check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months
(or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to
file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days.


Yes  [x]          No  [ ]
Exhibit 12.1
 Doral Financial
CorporationComputation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
 For the six month period endedJune 30, 2009Including Interest
      on DepositsEarnings:Pre-tax loss from
      continuing operations
    
    $
    (50,836
    )Plus:Fixed Charges
      (excluding capitalized interest)
    
    
    154,076Total
      Earnings
    
    $
    103,240Fixed
      Charges:Interest expensed and
      capitalized
    
    $
    152,822Amortized premiums,
      discounts, and capitalized expenses related to indebtedness
    
    
    90An estimate of the
      interest component within rental expense
    
    
    1,164Total Fixed
      Charges
    
    $
    154,076Ratio of Earnings to
      Fixed Charges
    
    
    (A)Excluding Interest
      on DepositsEarnings:Pre-tax loss from
      continuing operations
    
    $
    (50,836
    )Plus:Fixed Charges
      (excluding capitalized interest)
    
    
    84,997Total Earnings
    
    $
    34,161Fixed
      Charges:Interest expensed and
      capitalized
    
    $
    83,743Amortized premiums,
      discounts, and capitalized expenses related to indebtedness
    
    
    90An estimate of the
      interest component within rental expense
    
    
    1,164Total Fixed
      Charges
    
    $
    84,997Ratio of Earnings to
      Fixed Charges
    
    
    (A)
 (A)
    
    Due to the Companys pre-tax loss for the six month period ended June 30, 2009 the ratio coverage was less than 1:1. The Company would have to
      generate additional earnings of $65.5 million to achieve a ratio of
      1:1 during the first half  of 2009.
Exhibit 32.1



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



In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Life Energy & Technology  Holdings,
Inc.  (the  "Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ending August 31, 2003, as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"), I, Dr Christopher McCormack,  Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(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/Dr Christopher McCormack
-----------------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer (or equivalent thereof)

October 17, 2003
#### John E. Pilant *v.*David Wilson.

Infancy — Settlement—Pleading.

Where an infant, who is a party to a contract of settlement, fails to set up such infancy, he is hound by the terms of such settlement the same as if not an infant.

APPEAL PROM CALDWELL COURT OP COMMON PLEAS.

December 12, 1874.

*George W. Duvall, for appellant.*

*James Hewlett, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

Appellee does not deny the performance during the years 1867 and 1869 of the work and labor charged for, but he pleads as matter of defense that, at the end of 1869, appellant abandoned the contract under which he was then working, and that the parties entered into a new agreement, covering the years 1870 and 1871, which agreement has been fully performed. The making of this new agreement, which is proved beyond question, was in effect a full settlement between the parties as to the years 1867, 1868 and 1869.

As appellant was then an infant, he might have avoided the effect of this settlement by relying on his infancy; but he did not see-proper to do so. In his original petition he does not mention the fact of his infancy; and in his amended petition, filed after the settlement had been pleaded, he seems to have studiously avoided the assertion of any right he may have had, by reason of his non-age. As the pleadings stood, the action was properly tried as though both parties had all the while been adults. In this view of the case, the court did not err in giving instruction No. 2, asked by appellee, nor in refusing Nos. 3 and 4, asked by appellant.

Infancy to be made available for the purpose of escaping the consequences of a contract, must in some way be set up and relied on. It was not so set up and relied on in this case, and hence appellant cannot complain at being treated by the court as an adult.

Judgment *affirmed.*
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 244 (Friday, December 19, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 75794]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29716]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers


Closing Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock to Navigation, Located in 
Minneapolis, MN

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DOD.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Section 2010 of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act 
of 2014 (WRRDA) directed the Secretary of the Army to close the Upper 
St. Anthony Falls Lock and Dam located on the Mississippi River at 
river mile 853.9 no later than 1 year after the enactment date of WRRDA 
2014. The provision specifically allows the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers to continue to carry out emergency lock operations necessary 
to mitigate flood damage. The WRRDA was enacted on June 10, 2014. To 
comply with WRRDA, the Corps will close Upper St. Anthony Falls Lock to 
navigation by June 10, 2015. The final closure date will be determined, 
within the statutory deadline, after the environmental analysis 
required by the National Environmental Policy Act is complete.

DATES: The Draft Environmental Assessment for this lock closure action 
will be available for public comment through January 23, 2015. The 
public notice and a link to the Environmental Assessment can be found 
at: http://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/Home/PublicNotices.aspx.

ADDRESSES: Questions concerning the Draft Environmental Assessment can 
be addressed to Mr. Elliott Stefanik, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 180 
Fifth Street East, Suite 700, St. Paul, MN 55101-1678, or by email at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d4b1b8b8bdbba0a0fab8faa7a0b1b2b5babdbf94a1a7b5b7b1fab5a6b9adfab9bdb8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="60050c0c090f14144e0c4e13140506010e090b2015130103054e01120d194e0d090c">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeffrey McKee at Corps of 
Engineers Headquarters in Washington, DC, by phone at 202-761-8648.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The legal authority for the regulation 
governing the use, administration, and navigation of the Upper St. 
Anthony Falls lock is Section 4 of the River and Harbor Act of August 
18, 1894 (28 Stat. 362), as amended, which is codified at 33 U.S.C. 
Section 1. This statute requires the Secretary of the Army to 
``prescribe such regulations for the use, administration, and 
navigation of the navigable waters of the United States'' as the 
Secretary determines may be required by public necessity. Reference 33 
CFR 207.300, Mississippi River above Cairo, Ill., and their 
tributaries; use, administration, and navigation.

Brenda S. Bowen,
Army Federal Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2014-29716 Filed 12-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720-58-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 32.1



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


In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Global  Environmental  Energy Corp.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending February 28, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Dr Christopher  McCormack,  Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,
pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  ss.  1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to Section  906 of the
Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

     (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/Dr Christopher McCormack
-----------------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer (or equivalent thereof)

Date:  April 25, 2005









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

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
required by Section 906,  has been  provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.
Exhibit 21.1



List of Subsidiaries of OMNOVA Solutions Inc.(1)



The following is a list of the subsidiaries of OMNOVA Solutions Inc., an Ohio corporation (the Corporation) as of
November 30, 2007. The common stock of OMNOVA Wallcovering (USA), Inc., OMNOVA Wallcovering (UK) Limited, OMNOVA Performance Chemicals (UK) Ltd. Muraspec N.A. LLC, OMNOVA Decorative Products (Thailand) Co., Ltd., Omnova Decorative Products
(Shanghai) Co., Ltd. and OMNOVA Decorative Products (Taicang) Co., Ltd. is wholly owned, directly or indirectly, by the Corporation.



|                                               |  |                                        
|---------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------
|Name of Corporation                            |  | State of Incorporation                 
|OMNOVA Wallcovering (USA), Inc.                |  | Ohio                                   
|OMNOVA Wallcovering (UK), Limited              |  | United Kingdom limited company         
|OMNOVA Performance Chemicals (UK) Ltd.         |  | United Kingdom limited company         
|Muraspec N.A. LLC                              |  | Delaware limited liability company     
|OMNOVA Decorative Products (Thailand) Co., Ltd |  | Thailand limited company               
|OMNOVA Decorative Products (Shanghai) Co., Ltd |  | Chinese wholly foreign owned enterprise
|OMNOVA Decorative Products (Taicang) Co., Ltd  |  | Chinese wholly foreign owned enterprise



|(1) |  | The Corporation also controls, directly or indirectly, eleven other companies that, in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, would not constitute a significant subsidiary, as such
term is defined in Rule 1-02 (w) of Regulation S-X.
|--- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-20-00456-CV

In re Frederick Manuel

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

__________________________________________

Edward Smith, Justice

Before Justices Goodwin, Triana, and Smith

Filed: October 6, 2020
#### John N. Crutcher *v.*Commonwealth.

Criminal Pleading — Suit on Recognizance — Surety.

Where a charge of assault and battery is made and a surety signs a recognizance bond and afterwards the charge is changed, charging a felony, the surety is not liable in case of default, but where the first charge is amended after bond given but no new or higher offense is charged, such surety is still bound.

APPEAL FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT.

January 6, 1875.

*Major & Jett, J. L. Scott, J. B. Major, for appellant.*

*John Rodman, for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Pryor:

Upon an examination of the record we have been unable to find any amendment made in the proceedings against Walcott, by which the commonwealth had abandoned the prosecution for an assault and battery, and charged the accused with a felony.

If, as maintained by counsel, the warrant had been so worded as to make it a felonj*-, it might be regarded as a mutual dismissal of the minor offense, and a surety could hardly be held on a bond for an appearance to answer a misdemeanor, when the proceeding under which the bond was executed had been dismissed and a warrant for felony substituted. The surety might be willing to bind himself for the appearance of a party charged with a minor offense, when he would refuse to become bound when the offense was a higher grade, and the penalty or punishment materially increased. In this case the original and amended warrants or specifications both contain charges for a misdemeanor. The one is for an assault and battery, and the amendment is for striking and wounding Mary Walcott with intent to kill. This is no felony, if proven, and one magistrate had the power to hear the case and to hold the accused for his appearance; nor is it even a charge embraced by the statute for shooting, cutting, etc., with intent to kill; but it is a mere statement of facts that constitute the offense of an assault and battery, and if embraced by the statute, being a misdemeanor only, the rights of the sureties were in no manner affected by the amendment.- The answer of the defendants presenting no defense, the court acted properly in making them liable. ■

Judgment *affirmed.*
Initial Report of TGDC Recommendations Delivered to Election Assistance Commission 

On May 9, 2005, the Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC) delivered 

an initial set of recommendations for new voluntary voting system guidelines (known as 

the May 9, 2005 Voluntary Voting System Guidelines Version 1, Initial Report) to the 

Election Assistance Commission (EAC). The EAC will review these recommendations 

over the next few weeks and make a determination as to what they will put forward as the 

EAC’s proposed voting system guidelines for public comment. 

Notice of the public comment period on the EAC’s proposed guidelines will be posted in 

the Federal Register. EAC will make the proposed guidelines document available for 

download from their website as well as in hardcopy and CD. A template will be provided 

for those who wish to submit comments. The EAC homepage will contain a direct link to 

the proposed guidelines document as well as instructions for how to obtain this document 

in other formats and how to submit comments. 

For further information regarding the EAC proposed guidelines document, please contact 

the EAC at votingsystemguidelines@eac.gov.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

JOE HENRY SCOTT, III, : 

 Plaintiff, : 

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 09-0677-CG-C 

WALTER MYERS, et al., : 

 Defendants. : 

JUDGMENT

 It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that this action be and is hereby 

DISMISSED without prejudice. 

DONE and ORDERED this 8th day of June, 2010. 

 /s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:09-cv-00677-CG-C Document 13 Filed 06/08/10 Page 1 of 1
11 TH C OURT OF A PPEALS
E ASTLAND , T EXAS
J UDGMENT

Horacio Garcia Castro
, * From the 106th District Court of Dawson County, Trial Court No. 06

- 6609

.

Vs. No. 11

- 14

- 00002

- CR * August 7, 2014

The State of Texas, * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., Willson , J. , and Bailey, J. )
This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opi nion, w e modify the judgment of the trial court by deleting the following language from the judgments: “APPOINTMENT OF ATTORNEY FEE: $300.00.” As modified,
we affirm.
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.                  

###### Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board

# AGENCY:

Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces a change in the membership of the Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board for the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB).

# DATES:

Effective December 19, 2014.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John Lau, Human Resources Director, (202) 261-7600.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(1) requires each agency to establish, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, a performance review board (PRB). The PRB reviews initial performance ratings of members of the Senior Executive Service (SES) and makes recommendations as to final annual performance ratings for senior executives. Because the CSB is a small independent Federal agency, the SES members of the CSB's PRB are drawn from other Federal agencies.

The Chairperson of the CSB has appointed the following individuals to the CSB Senior Executive Service PRB:

PRB Members—Fran Leonard, Chief of Staff, Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service serves as Chair of the PRB. William Huneke, Director, Office of Economics, Surface Transportation Board will serve as a Member of the PRB.

                    Nancy Weiss, General Counsel, Institute of Museum and Library Services, continues to serve as a Member of the PRB, as announced in the                     **Federal Register**                     of September 20, 2013 (78 FR 57837).                

                    This notice is published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to the requirement of 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4).                

Dated: December 15, 2014.

Rafael Moure-Eraso,

Chairperson.

[FR Doc. 2014-29711 Filed 12-18-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6350-01-P
#### Susan B. Settle’s Adm’r *v.*Jerry S. Gordon.

Appeal — Interlocutory Order.

An order of tbe court directing a party to pay money into court is an interlocutory order and cannot be appealed from, but an order directing tbe money to be paid over to one of tbe parties is a final order and may be appealed from.

APPEAL PROM BARREN CIRCUIT COURT.

October 19, 1876.

Opinion by

Judge Cofer :

The order directing the appellant to pay into court the amount of the appellee’s claim was only interlocutory, but the order directing it to be paid over to him was final and might have been appealed from and superseded. It decided the rights of the parties as to that fund, and the court had no power, after the term, to set aside the order, or to require the appellee to pay back the money, and the rule was properly discharged.

Sec. 42, Art. 2, Chap. 39, Gen. Stat., relates to voluntary payments, and not to such as are made under the judgment of a court. The appellant did not pay because he supposed that the estate was solvent, or on account of any mistake on his part, but because the court so ordered. There is no appeal from the orders requiring the money to be paid to the clerk and requiring him to pay it to the appellee, and *776as long as those orders stand unreversed, the order appealed from must be held correct.

*P. PI.*Leslie, *for appellant. I. P.*Garnett, *for appellee.*

Judgment *affirmed.*