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


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                                   APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                     DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                                                     0
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                              0
<ALLOWANCES>                                               0
<INVENTORY>                                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           0
<PP&E>                                                     0
<DEPRECIATION>                                            00
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                      0
<BONDS>                                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                              15,610
<OTHER-SE>                                           (15,610)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               0
<SALES>                                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           0
<CGS>                                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         79,947
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                         0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      (79,947)
<INCOME-TAX>                                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  (79,947)
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                         (79,947)
<EPS-BASIC>                                            (.001)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          (.001)



</TABLE>
No. 28.

#### Cloverleaf Butter Co. *v.*Patterson, Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries of Alabama, et al.

The opinion of February 2, 1942, *ante,*p. 148, is amended as follows:

On page 4, line 5, strike out the words “comes under” and substitute therefor the words “is subject to.”

On page 14, line 15, strike out the word “watches” and substitute therefor the words “has authority to watch.” On page 15, line 7, strike out the word “subjected” and substitute therefor the word “subject.”

On page 15, lines 7 and 8, strike out the word “continuous.”

Respondents’ petition for rehearing is denied.

Opinion reported as amended, *ante,*p. 148.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Luis Febles, Appellant.

[977 NYS2d 663]

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (William Mogulescu, J.), rendered on or about April 9, 2010, said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Sweeny, Moskowitz, Freedman and Clark, JJ.
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2504 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Primid XL–552. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

Mr. GRAHAM introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Primid XL–552. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PRIMID XL–552. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 N,N,N′,N′-Tetrakis(2-hydroxyethyl)-hexane diamide 

(CAS No. 6334–25–4) (provided for in subheading 

3824.90.4090) ....................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2504 IS

1 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

2 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Unassociated Document


    Letter
      of
      Intent for Strategic Partnership

    


    Party
      A:
      Hangzhou Xituo Network Technology Company

    


    Party
      B:
      Zhejiang Yongxin Digital Technology Company

     

    


    Hangzhou
      Xituo Network Technology Company (“Party A”) is a company specializing in 3C
      products (Communications, Consumer electronics, and Computing), and operates
      an
      online website for the selling of such products as a merchant.

    


    Zhejiang
      Yongxin Technology Limitred (“Party B”) is a company specialized in 3C products
      and in the retailing and logistics of such products. It is the subsidiary of
      China 3C. Its sales cover Eastern China and has a state-of-the-art retailing
      and
      logistics system.

    


    Now,
      therefore, both Parties A and B hereby agree, for the purpose of the benefit
      of
      sales, and to leverage each of the parties’ competitive advantages, and for
      mutual benefit, to agree to the following:

    


    Party
      A
      hereby designates Party B as the exclusive supplier of 3C products for its
      website.

    


    Party
      B
      undertakes to become a trustworthy and long-term supplier to Party A of genuine
      products with proper documentation, and the products will be not be restricted
      as to sales in any way.

    


    This
      document will be executed in duplicate, with a copy to each party.

     

    


    Party
      A:
      Signature of Hangzhou Xituo Network Technology Company

    


    Party
      B:
      Signature of Zhejiang Yongxin Digital Technology Company

    


    


    Executed
      this 22 Day of November, 2007
#### State v. Duarte

Case below: 174 N.C. App. 626

No. 653P05

1. AG’s Motion for Temporary Stay (COA04-1455)

2. AG’s Petition for Writ of Supersedeas

3. AG’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

4. Def’s Motion for Appeal

1. Allowed 360 N.C. 178

Stay dissolved 12/19/06

2. Denied 12/19/06

3. See Special Order Page 153

4. Dismissed Ex Mero Motu 01/26/06
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2633 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2633

  To suspend temporarily the duty on certain tamper resistant ground 
                 fault circuit interrupter receptacles.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 2, 2009

Mr. Schumer (for himself and Mrs. Gillibrand) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend temporarily the duty on certain tamper resistant ground 
                 fault circuit interrupter receptacles.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN TAMPER RESISTANT GROUND FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER 
              RECEPTACLES.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Ground Fault        Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        Circuit                                                            31/2011.......
                        Interrupter
                        Receptacles with
                        protective
                        internal shutter
                        to prevent
                        insertion of
                        foreign objects
                        thereby giving
                        the GFCI
                        receptacle the
                        property of being
                        `tamper
                        resistant',
                        clearly marked TR
                        on receptacle
                        face plate,
                        meeting the 2008
                        National Electric
                        Code Section
                        406.11, for 15 A
                        or 20 A (provided
                        for in subheading
                        8536.30.80)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 23.3


                          Independent Auditor's Report


         The Board of Directors and Stockholders
         BREED Technologies, Inc.:

         We have audited the consolidated statements of earnings,  stockholders'
         equity, and cash flows of BREED Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries for
         the year ended June 30, 1995. These consolidated  financial  statements
         are the responsibility of the Company's management.  Our responsibility
         is to express an opinion  on these  consolidated  financial  statements
         based on our audit.

         We conducted our audit in accordance with generally  accepted  auditing
         standards.  Those standards  require that we plan and perform the audit
         to obtain reasonable  assurance about whether the financial  statements
         are free from material misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a
         test basis,  evidence  supporting  the amounts and  disclosures  in the
         financial  statements.  An audit also includes assessing the accounting
         principles used and significant  estimates made by management,  as well
         as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe
         that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

         In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above
         present fairly, in all material respects, the results of operations and
         cash flows of BREED  Technologies,  Inc. and  subsidiaries for the year
         ended June 30, 1995, in conformity with generally  accepted  accounting
         principles.

         As discussed in note 1 of the notes to the consolidated financial 
         statements,  BREED Technologies,  Inc.  adopted  provisions  of the
         Financial  Accounting Standards Board's Statement of Financial  
         Accounting Standards No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes, as of July 
         1, 1993.


         /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick, LLP
         KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
         Tampa, Florida
         July 21,1995
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #11758]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This is a notice of an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration for the State of California, dated 05/21/2009.

*Incident:*                         California Salmon Fishery Closure 2009.                    

*Incident Period:*                         04/08/2009 and continuing.                    

*Effective Date:*                         05/21/2009.                    

*EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         02/22/2010.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's EIDL declaration, applications for economic injury disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations.

The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:

Primary Counties:

Del Norte, Mendocino, Monterey, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Sonoma.

Contiguous Counties:

California:

Alameda, Fresno, Glenn, Humboldt, Kings, Lake, Marin, Napa, San Benito, San Francisco, San Luis Obispo, Santa Clara, Siskiyou, Solano, Tehama, Trinity.

Oregon:

Curry, Josephine.

The Interest Rate is: 4.000.

The number assigned to this disaster for economic injury is 117580.

The States which received an EIDL Declaration # are California, Oregon.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59002)

May 21, 2009.

Karen G. Mills,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. E9-12508 Filed 5-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 4 A0 86 7

. RONI SHA GUI DRY v

. RESI DENTI AL HOME BUYER

ATLANTA, LLC.

Resid enti a l H ome B uyer A tlanta, LLC f iled a d isp o ssesso ry ac tio n against

Ro nisha Gu id ry. I n an o r d e r e n t ered on D ec ember 4, 2023, the state c o u rt granted

Resid e ntial H o me B u yer a d ef au lt ju d gment and w rit o f p o ssessio n. On D ec ember 21

, 2023, Gu id ry f

iled a no tic e o f ap p e al to this Co u rt. W e, ho w ev er, lac k j u risd ic tio n.

Und er OCGA § 44- 7 -56

, an ap p eal f ro m a trial c o u r t j u d gment in a

d isp o ssesso ry p ro c eed ing m u st be f iled w ithin s ev en d a

y s o f the d ate the j u d gment w as

entered

. See Ra di

o S a n dy S pri n gs , In c. v

. A llen Ro a d Jo i

nt Ven tu re , 31 1 G a. A p p

. 334,

335- 336 ( 7 1 5 SE2d 7 52) ( 201 1 ); R a y M

. W r i g ht, In c. v. Jo n es , 239 Ga. A p p

. 5 21

,

522- 523 (521 SE2d 456 ) (1 9 9 9 ). The p ro p er and timely f iling o f a no tic e o f ap p eal is an

abso lu te requ irement to c onf e r j u risd ic tio n o n this Co u rt. Jo n es , 239 Ga. A p p

. at 523.

Gu id ry f iled h e r n otic e o f ap p eal 1 7 d ays af ter entry o f the state c o urt’ s o rd er.

A c c o rd ingly, this ap p eal is u ntimely and is hereby D I SM I SSED

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a ls o f t h e S t a t e o f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O ffic e , A t la n t a ,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I c e r t ify t h a t t h e a b o v e is a tr u e e

x t r a c t fr o m

t h e m in u t e s o f t h e C o u r t o f A pp e a ls o f G e o r g ia

.

W it n e s s m y s ig n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o f s a id c o u r t

h e r e t o a ffix e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r la s t a b o v e w r

it t e n

.

, C le r

k

. January 24, 2024

01/24/2024
##### 



Exhibit 32 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 In connection with the report of Spectre Gaming, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ronald
E. Eibensteiner, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I Brian D. Niebur,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of our knowledge,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, 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/ Ronald E. Eibensteiner  Ronald E. Eibensteiner
Chief Executive Officer
March 24, 2004 /s/ Brian D. Niebur  Brian D. Niebur
Chief Financial Officer
March 24, 2004 37
#### Maninder Bhugra, Appellant, v Massachusetts Casualty Insurance Company et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

[963 NYS2d 863]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered October 25, 2011, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment against defendants Massachusetts Casualty Insurance Company, Centre Life Insurance Company, Centre Solutions, and Zurich American Insurance Company (the MCIC defendants), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

This Court previously determined that the MCIC defendants timely served their answer in accordance with the parties’ writ*686ten stipulation *(Bhugra v Massachusetts Cas. Ins. Co.,*94 AD3d 563 [1st Dept 2012], *appeal dismissed*19 NY3d 1064 [2012]). Accordingly, this Court essentially held that the MCIC defendants were never in default, and that determination operates to foreclose reexamination of the question of default on this appeal *{see Morrison Cohen, LLP v Fink,*92 AD3d 514 [1st Dept 2012], *lv dismissed*19 NY3d 1017 [2012]; *Eastside Exhibition Corp. v 210 E. 86th St. Corp.,*79 AD3d 417 [1st Dept 2010], *affd on other grounds*18 NY3d 617 [2012], *cert denied*568 US —, 133 S Ct 654 [2012]). Moreover, that determination renders academic plaintiffs arguments concerning whether the MCIC defendants failed to show a reasonable excuse for the default or a meritorious defense *{see Rossini Excavating Corp. v Shelter Rock Bldrs., LLC,*89 AD3d 467 [1st Dept 2011]).

We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur—Acosta, J.E, Moskowitz, Renwick, Freedman and Clark, JJ.
Exhibit
31.2



CERTIFICATION



I,
Leandro Vera, Chief Financial Officer of Nano Magic Inc, certify that: (1) I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual
report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019 of Nano Magic Inc.; and (2) based on my knowledge, this report does not
contain any untrue statement of 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, misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.



|Date:
    May 15, 2020 |                            
|---------------------- | ---------------------------
|                       |                            
|                       | /s/
    Leandro Vera       
|                       | Leandro
    Vera           
|                       | Chief
    Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 as of March
31, 2009 and for the periods then ended.
 /s/    Gregory T. RoyalGregory T. RoyalChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
#### Barbara Bracker, Respondent, v New York City Transit Authority, Appellant.

[977 NYS2d 234]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered January 20, 2012, upon a jury verdict, awarding plaintiff the total sum of $204,104.52, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiff *(see Bello v New York City Tr. Auth.,*50 AD3d 511 [1st Dept 2008]) and giving great deference to the jury’s fact-finding function *(see generally White v New York City Tr. Auth.,*40 AD3d 297 [1st Dept 2007]), we conclude that the jury’s findings are supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence *(see Cohen v Hallmark Cards,*45 NY2d 493 [1978]; *Nicastro v Park,*113 AD2d 129, 132-133 [2d Dept 1985]). Evidence in the form of deposition testimony and trial testimony from defendant’s material witnesses, viewed together with plaintiffs trial testimony, provided circumstantial evidence from which the jury could reasonably infer that a claimed sticky soda spill on defendant’s internal stairs had existed for a sufficient length of time to allow defendant’s on-site cleaning workers to have discovered the hazardous substance and to have remedied the condition prior to plaintiffs accident *(see Gordon v American Museum of Natural History,*67 NY2d 836 [1986]).

Defendant failed to preserve its argument on appeal that the verdict was irreconcilably inconsistent because plaintiff was found to be comparatively negligent, but that such negligence was not a substantial cause of her accident *(see e.g. Askin v City of New York,*56 AD3d 394, 396 [1st Dept 2008], *lv dismissed*12 NY3d 769 [2009]). Were we to reach the issue, we would find *521that there is a reasonable view of the evidence that, inter alia, plaintiff could be found to be negligent for observing the condition of the allegedly sticky step as she stepped down onto it, but that such negligence was not so inextricably interwoven with the proximate cause of her fall as would warrant a retrial on the issue of plaintiffs comparative negligence *(see id.*at 396; *cf. Fisk v City of New York,*74 AD3d 658 [1st Dept 2010]). Concur— Tom, J.E, Andrias, Saxe, DeGrasse and Richter, JJ.
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
    <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width" />
    <meta name="robots" content="noindex">
    <title>Strategic Plans & Reports - NIDDK</title>
    
<meta name="VIcurrentDateTime" content="638490779802085070" />
<meta name="VirtualFolder" content="/" />
<script type="text/javascript" src="/layouts/system/VisitorIdentification.js"></script>

</head>
<body>
    <div></div>
</body>
</html>