alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"status":true,"count":4,"text":"\u003Cp class=\u0022messages messages--status\u0022\u003EAdded to cart\u003C\/p\u003E","id":"ajax-addtocart-message-14316","block":"\u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-grid basic-cart-block\u0022\u003E\n  \n\n          \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-contents row\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-node-title cell\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/publication-products\/age-related-hearing-loss\u0022\u003EAge-Related Hearing Loss\u003C\/a\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\n              \n        \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-unit-price cell\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E    \n        \u003C\/div\u003E\n    \u003C\/div\u003E\n          \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-contents row\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-node-title cell\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/publication-products\/american-sign-language\u0022\u003EAmerican Sign Language\u003C\/a\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\n              \n        \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-unit-price cell\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E    \n        \u003C\/div\u003E\n    \u003C\/div\u003E\n          \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-contents row\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-node-title cell\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/publication-products\/aphasia\u0022\u003EAphasia\u003C\/a\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\n              \n        \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-unit-price cell\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E    \n        \u003C\/div\u003E\n    \u003C\/div\u003E\n          \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-contents row\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-node-title cell\u0022\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022\/publication-products\/apraxia-speech\u0022\u003EApraxia of Speech\u003C\/a\u003E \u003C\/div\u003E\n              \n        \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-unit-price cell\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Cstrong\u003E\u003C\/strong\u003E    \n        \u003C\/div\u003E\n    \u003C\/div\u003E\n      \n  \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-total-price-contents row\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-total-price cell\u0022\u003E\n            Total Price: \u003Cstrong\u003E 0,00 USD \u003C\/strong\u003E\n        \u003C\/div\u003E\n      \u003C\/div\u003E \n\n\n         \n\n\n       \u003Cdiv class=\u0022basic_cart-cart-checkout-button basic_cart-cart-checkout-button-block row\u0022\u003E\n        \u003Ca href=\u0027\/cart\u0027 class=\u0027button\u0027\u003EView cart \u003C\/a\u003E\n      \u003C\/div\u003E\n\n\n  \u003C\/div\u003E"}
EXHIBIT 32.1

Officers Certification Pursuant to

Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(18 U.S.C 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Pioneer Drilling Company, a Texas corporation, (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Wm. Stacy Locke, President and Chief Executive Officer, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of his knowledge:

(1) The Report is in full compliance 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.



|                        |  |  |  |  |  |                                      
|----------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|Dated: November 5, 2009 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Wm. Stacy Locke                  
|                        |  |  |  |  |  | Wm. Stacy Locke                      
|                        |  |  |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                                                              EXHIBIT 10.21(e)

                              FIFTH AMENDMENT TO
                               HFS INCORPORATED
                  AMENDED AND RESTATED 1993 STOCK OPTION PLAN

                             AMENDED AND RESTATED
                              AS OF JUNE 14, 1994

                       FURTHER AMENDED AS OF MAY 5, 1995
                    FURTHER AMENDED AS OF JANUARY 22, 1996
                    FURTHER AMENDED AS OF JANUARY 22, 1996
                      FURTHER AMENDED AS OF MAY 20, 1996

The HFS Incorporated Amended and Restated 1993 Stock Option Plan (the
"Restated Plan") is hereby further amended as follows:

         1.       Amendment.  Section 3 of the Restated Plan is hereby
amended by adding a new subsection (c), to read as follows:

                           "(c) Notwithstanding anything contained herein to
                  the contrary, the Committee shall be authorized to delegate
                  to another committee of the Board the authority to grant
                  options in accordance with Section 3(b)(i) of this Plan,
                  provided that such other committee shall not have the
                  authority to make any such grants to Non- Employee Directors
                  or to Participants who are, as of the date of such grant,
                  required to report transactions in the Company's securities
                  under Section 16 of the Exchange Act."

         2.       Ratification.  Except as expressly set forth in this
Fifth Amendment to the Restated Plan, the Restated Plan, as
previously amended, is hereby ratified and confirmed without
modification.

         3.       Effective Date.  The effective date of this Fifth
Amendment to the Restated Plan shall be July 24, 1996.
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Michele Nakazawa, Chief Financial Officer of Telos Corporation, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Telos Corporation; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and 

 

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors: 

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: May 16, 2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRATED FROM THE SECOND
QUARTER 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                             8,410
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               325
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                  85,287
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                       0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                       15,230
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           147,864
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             148,780
<LOANS>                                          766,091
<ALLOWANCE>                                       14,412
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,019,143
<DEPOSITS>                                       905,384
<SHORT-TERM>                                       4,240
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                               13,180
<LONG-TERM>                                       15,677
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                           5,388
<OTHER-SE>                                        75,274
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 1,019,143
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                   28,711
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  7,908
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                       0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                  36,619
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                21,265
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                21,829
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                             14,790
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        157
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                     0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    7,237
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    8,611
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         8,611
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                       5,428
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       1.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       1.03
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                      3.02
<LOANS-NON>                                        3,623
<LOANS-PAST>                                           0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                       0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                        0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                  14,266
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                         54
<RECOVERIES>                                          43
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                 14,412
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                              14,412
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                           13,864
        

</TABLE>
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration  Statements No.
333-12241 and 333-24659 of Medix Resources, Inc. (formerly International Nursing
Services, Inc.) on Forms S-3 of our report dated April 2, 1999 appearing in this
annual  report  on Form  10-KSB  of Medix  Resources,  Inc.  for the year  ended
December 27, 1998.



July 23, 1999
Denver, Colorado

                                         /s/ Ehrhardt Keefe Steiner & Hottman PC
                                             Ehrhardt Keefe Steiner & Hottman PC
#### State v. Colson

Case below: 186 N.C. App.-(2 October 2007)

No. 512P07

AG’s Motion for Temporary Stay (COA07-107)

Allowed 10/19/07
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 March 28, 2014

t0324

Order 

Clerk

March 28, 2014

148214

ALBERT BEST, DEBORAH AUSTIN, and

MARTHA SZOSTAK,

Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants,

and

SHARON DAY and JULIAN HOWARD,

Plaintiffs/Counter- Defendants-Appellees,

and

VIVIAN BEST, CHERYL CRIST, HEIDI

RICE, MICHAEL A. VALLILLO, and

MARIA VALLILLO,

Plaintiffs,

v SC: 148214

COA: 305317 

Oakland CC: 2008-096952-CZ

PARK WEST GALLERIES, INC.,

Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff/

Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant, 

and

ALBERT SCAGLIONE and MORRIS

SHAPIRO,

Defendants-Appellants,

and

ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD.,

Defendant-Appellee,

and

FINE ART REGISTRY and FRANK HUNTER, Third-Party Defendants.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 5, 2013 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
NO. 07-0 5-0199-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILL O PANEL A MARCH 2, 200 6

____________

____________

______ LALENA RENEE MOORE, APP ELLANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

____________

____________

_________ FROM THE 31ST DISTRICT COURT OF GRAY COUNTY; NO. 6707; HONORABLE ST EVEN R. E MMERT, JUDGE

____________

____________

_______ Before REAVIS and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. MEMORANDUM OPINI ON Followi ng a plea o f

not guilty, appellant Lalena Renee Moore was conv icted by a ju ry of possessi on of a controll ed substance. The tr ial court ass essed punish ment at one year confin ementin a state jail facility, suspended for two years , and a $1,000 fine, wh ic h was no t suspende d. The clerk’s record was fi led on A ug ust 2, 2005, and a s upplemental clerk’s record contai ning the t rial cour t’s cert ific ation of def

endant’ s righ t of a ppeal wasfil ed on Augus t 15,

### 2

2005. The cour

t repor ter wasnotif

ied by le tter

dated J uly 19, 2005, t hat th e deadli ne for fili ng the reporter’s record ha d lapsed. Two extensio ns of time in which to fil e the reporter’srecord were grante d due toappell ant’s fail ure to submit a writ ten d esign ation and to make arrangeme nts to pay fo r the record . Couns el for appell antwas the n direc ted tocerti fy compl iance wi th Rule s 34.6(b) (1) and 35. 3(b) of the Texas R ules of

Appell ate Pro cedure to thisCourt n o late r than August 30, 200 5, howev er, co unsel f ailed to respond, and the courtreporter fi led a third r equest for an ext ension o f ti me. By l etter dated S eptember 14, 2005, the de adline for filing appellant’s brief was set for Oc tober 13, 200 5 and th at purs uant to Rule 37. 3(c), counsel was not ifie d that only poi nts or

issuesthat do not r

equire a reporter’s r

ecord co uld be r

aised. Appell antdid not

fil e a bri ef and wa s notif ied by letter dated October 20, 2005, that fail ure to do so or

respond w ould result in the appe al being abated
. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b). Appell antdid not

respond nor fi le a br ief and the appea l was abated on N ovember 14 , 2005. On February 24, 2006, a second s upplemental cl erk’s record was fi led containing findi ngs of fact and conclusions of law b y the trial court indicating appellan t did not want to prosecute her appeal. Accordingly, the app eal ishereby d ismiss ed for wan t of p rosecution and for failure to comply with this Cou rt’s directive. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b) & (c).

Don H. Reavis Justi ce Do not pu blish.
#### Flannery & Co. *v.*The Baldwin Fertilizer Co.

‘Where the service in a statutory proceeding to foreclose a mortgage-on realty was regularly returned by the sheriff as made upon a special agent of the mortgagor, a creditor of the mortgagor whe had a general judgment junior to the mortgage could not dispute the legality of the service by showing, on a rule to distribute money, that the person served was not in fact a special agent of' the mortgagor at the date of the service, it not appearing that the mortgagor had repudiated the service, or taken any steps to traverse the sheriff’s return, or to have the judgment ' of foreclosure set aside. In rendering the judgment of foreclosure the superior-court necessarily adjudicated upon the fact of service and its sufficiency, the mode of service being one of those expressly enumerated by statute. Code, §3962. *Judgment reversed.*

August 20, 1894.

Money rule. Before Judge Smith. Dodge superior court. September term, 1898. •

A rule for distribution of money in the sheriff’s hands was brought by John Flannery & Co. The Baldwin Fertilizer Co. intervened, claiming the fund upon its execution, and alleging that, while the mortgage of Flannery *&*Co., upon which their execution issued by foreclosure, was senior to intervener’s judgment in attach*697ment, it was not entitled to the fund raised by the sheriff’s sale, for the reason that the mortgage foreclosure was void, there having been no service of the rule *nisi*upon Coleman, the defendant in execution, nor acknowledgment of service, nor appearance and pleading nor other waiver by said defendant, the only pretense of service being upon Peacock as special agent of Coleman, whereas Peacock was not the special agent of Coleman upon whom service could be perfected. Movants denied the right of intervener to participate in the distribution, or to inquire into the validity of the mortgage *ji. fa.*and judgment of foreclosure, or to make the issue that Peacock was not in fact the special agent of Coleman, the mortgagor, this being a personal privilege and right of Coleman alone; and objected to testimony by Peacock, that he was not the special agent of Coleman at the time he was served with the rule *nisi.*The overruling of this contention and objection was assigned as error.

DeLacy & Bishop, for plaintiff in error.

E. A. Smith and W. M. Clements, *contra.*
#### In the Matter of Garland Reese, Petitioner, v Albert Prack, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

[962 NYS2d 826]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a tier III disciplinary determination finding him guilty of drug use. We now confirm. The information contained in the request for urinalysis form satisfactorily established the chain of custody of petitioner’s urine specimen, and any discrepancies between that form and the testimony of the correction officers who collected and tested it were adequately explained *(see*7 NYCRR 1020.4; *Matter of Hall v Venettozzi,*98 AD3d 773, 773-774 [2012]; *Matter of White v Fischer,*85 AD3d 1483, 1483-1484 [2011]). The positive test results and related documentation, misbehavior report and hearing testimony provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt *(see Matter of Hall v Venettozzi,*98 AD3d at 773). To the extent that petitioner’s remaining arguments are properly before us, they have been examined and found to lack merit.

Mercure, J.P., Lahtinen, Garry and Egan Jr., JJ., concur.

*1237Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
**UNPUBLISHED**

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 1077** 

HUICHUN LIN , Petitioner ,

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General , Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Su bmitted : December 2 1 , 2011 Decided: January 5, 2012

Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and AGEE , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion

.

Gary J. Yerman, New York, New York , for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, John S . Hogan , Senior Litigation Counsel, Robbin K. Blaya , Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Huichun Lin, a n ative and citizen of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing her appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of her applications for relief from removal. Lin first challenges the determination that she fa iled to establish eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of

per secution.” INS v. Elias

- Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 483

- 84 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Lin fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary
result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Lin cannot meet
the more stri ngent standard for withholding of removal. Chen v.

INS , 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir. 1999); INS v. Cardoza

- Fonseca , 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). Finally, we uphold the finding below that Lin failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than not
that she woul d be tortured if removed to China. 8 C.F.R.

§ 1208.16(c)(2) (2011). We accordingly deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argum ent would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
EXHIBIT 32.2

Certification

I, Michael H. Mulroy, Senior Vice President, Chief
Financial Officer, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of Questcor Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Rule 13(a)-14(b) or Rule 15(d)-14(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2011 (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 780(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.

Dated: February 22, 2012

/s/ MICHAEL H. MULROYMichael H. Mulroy,Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)