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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM THE CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOUND ON PAGES 1-3 OF
THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB FOR THE YEAR-TO-DATE AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          67,429
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,231,348
<ALLOWANCES>                                   517,294
<INVENTORY>                                    777,874
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,719,275
<PP&E>                                       9,779,619
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,077,894
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,638,776
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,436,829
<BONDS>                                      5,101,042
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,089,638
<COMMON>                                       139,404
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,014,860)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,638,776
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,969,701
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,164,925
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                42,500
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             213,717
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (416,235)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (416,235)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (416,235)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.10)
        

</TABLE>
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 12

- 00375

- CR

Pablo Garcia

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From Criminal District Court No. 4

o f Tarrant County (1219623D )

November 7, 2013

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By

_________________________________ Justice Lee Gabriel
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 592 Referred in House (RFH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 592

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 16, 2005

                 Referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To amend the Irrigation Project Contract Extension Act of 1998 to 
extend certain contracts between the Bureau of Reclamation and certain 
  irrigation water contractors in the States of Wyoming and Nebraska.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Glendo Unit of the Missouri River 
Basin Project Contract Extension Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. GLENDO UNIT OF THE MISSOURI RIVER BASIN CONTRACT EXTENSION.

    Section 2 of the Irrigation Project Contract Extension Act of 1998 
(112 Stat. 2816, 117 Stat. 1854) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``December 31, 2005'' 
        and inserting ``December 31, 2007''; and
            (2) in subsection (b)--
                    (A) by striking ``beyond December 31, 2005'' and 
                inserting ``beyond December 31, 2007''; and
                    (B) by striking ``before December 31, 2005'' and 
                inserting ``before December 31, 2007''.

            Passed the Senate November 16, 2005.

            Attest:

                                             EMILY J. REYNOLDS,

                                                             Secretary.
```
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
    <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width" />
    <meta name="robots" content="noindex">
    <title>Research Training & Career Development - NIDDK</title>
    
<meta name="VIcurrentDateTime" content="638490749243123690" />
<meta name="VirtualFolder" content="/" />
<script type="text/javascript" src="/layouts/system/VisitorIdentification.js"></script>

</head>
<body>
    <div></div>
</body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME OF WOLVERINE TUBE, INC. FOR THE
THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED MARCH 29, 1997, AND THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE
SHEET OF WOLVERINE TUBE, INC. AT MARCH 29, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1997
<CASH>                                           2,578
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   93,733<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     76,862
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               173,878
<PP&E>                                         151,018<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 417,470
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           55,558
<BONDS>                                        100,465
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,000
<COMMON>                                           140
<OTHER-SE>                                     217,468
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   417,470
<SALES>                                        173,576
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               173,576
<CGS>                                          151,981
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  151,981
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,660
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,424
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,511
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,674
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,837
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,837
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.62
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.62
<FN>
<F1>THE VALVES FOR THE TAGS RECEIVABLES AND PP&E ARE SHOWN NET OF THEIR RESPECTIVE
ALLOWANCE ACCOUNTS.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as                           ( print page 25251)                        amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.                

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Initial Review Group; Developmental Biology Subcommittee.                    

*Date:*                         June 15-16, 2009.                    

*Time:*                         8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Road, NW., Washington, DC 20015.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Norman Chang, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Blvd., Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-1485,                         *changn@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: May 15, 2009.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E9-12203 Filed 5-26-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
### ELECTRONIC RECORD 

# 6 S012. CCA# Ol-ll-00943-CR /Q/'//-&£>Wf'CtZ. OFFENSE: Habeas Corpus
PUNISHMENT: 

### lYrHG, 21 days Credit COUNTY: Harris MOTION FOR REHEARING IS: DATE: JUDGE: 

### Kufreabasi Ita Enyong v. The State of STYLE: Texas

TRIAL COURT: 

## TRIAL COURT#: TRIAL COURT JUDGE: The Honorable Paula Herring Goodhart Co Crim Ct at Law No l 1612023A DISPOSITION: REVREMAND DATE: 4/26/2012 JUSTICE: Hon. Terry Jennings



### PCN_SY_PUBLISH:Y DNP: N CLK RECORD: 10/27/20111 VOL. ^ 

## RPT RECORD: 11/8/2011 3VOLS. '"' STATE BR: 1/20/2012 .— 

### APPBR:12/12/2011 ^


# INTHE COURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALS *^ * * * ^^ 

# ELECTRONICRECORD CCA# W9^^%M f jj^ Jfrrlfc Petition FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: 

## DATE: V - Z V- 2.0/3 

## JUDGE: J^C 

# Disposition: /f^W/^^ DATE: V-2VZO/5 JUDGE: n&^ Uf^u^ SIGNED: PC: -^ PUBLISH: DNP: MOTION FOR REHEARING IN MOTION FOR STAY OF MANDATE IS: CCA IS: ON JUDGE: ON JUDGE:
exv10w2



 





EXHIBIT 10.2




[Pacific Sunwear of California, Inc. Letterhead]




September 28, 2007




Mr. Thomas Kennedy

[Address]

[City, State, Zip]





			
	Re:	 	Amendment of Employment Agreement





Dear Tom:



Reference is made to that certain Employment Agreement between you and Pacific Sunwear of
California, Inc., dated as of April 1, 2005 (the “Agreement”). The purpose of this letter
agreement is to amend the Agreement as follows:



The heading of Section 7 of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated, effective immediately, to
read “TERMINATION BY THE EXECUTIVE.” A new paragraph is hereby added to the end of Section 7 of
the Agreement, effective immediately, to read in its entirety as follows:



“Executive may terminate his employment hereunder at any time (without Good Reason) by
providing the Company with at least thirty (30) days advance notice of such termination. For
avoidance of doubt, Executive shall not be entitled to any payments or benefits set forth in
Section 6(b) hereof in the event that he terminates his employment with the Company other
than for Good Reason.”



This letter agreement does not modify any other terms of the Agreement except as expressly set
forth above. If this letter accurately sets forth our agreement with respect to the foregoing
matters, please sign the enclosed copy of this letter and return it to me.




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Sincerely,
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	/s/ SALLY FRAME KASAKS
 

	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Sally Frame Kasaks	 	 
	 

	 	Chief Executive Officer	 	 






	 	 	 	 	 
	Acknowledged and Agreed:	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ THOMAS KENNEDY
 

	 	 
	 

	 	Thomas Kennedy
AMENDMENT
      TO WARRANT AGREEMENT

     

    This
      Amendment to Warrant Agreement (this “Agreement”)
      is
      made and entered into as of November 26, 2007.

     

    RECITALS

     

    A. The
      undersigned ________________ (the “Holder”)
      is the
      holder of a warrant dated April 26, 2006 issued by Trulite, Inc., a Delaware
      corporation (the “Company”)
      to
      purchase from the Company up to ______ fully paid and non-assessable shares
      of
      the Company’s common stock, $0.0001 per share (the “Warrant”).

     

    B. The
      Warrant [as amended] provides that unless earlier terminated in accordance
      with
      its terms the Warrant may be exercised through 5:00 p.m. CST on April 26,
      2011.

     

    C.
      The
      Warrant provides that the Exercise Price for the shares of Common Stock issuable
      under this Warrant shall be $3.00 per share.

     

    D. The
      Board
      of Directors of the Company has determined that it is desirable and in the
      best
      interest of the Company to reduce the Exercise Price to $0.50 per share and,
      accordingly, has approved the amendment of the Warrant to so
      provide.

     

    NOW,
      THEREFORE,
      for and
      in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the
      receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged, the parties hereto agree
      as
      follows: 

     

    1. The
      Warrant is hereby amended so that each reference therein to the “Exercise Price”
shall mean Fifty Cents ($0.50) per share of Common Stock issuable under the
      Warrant.

     

    2. Except
      as
      amended herein, the Warrant remains unchanged.

     

    IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first
      written.

     

    
      	 	
              TRULITE,
                INC.

            
	 	 
	 	
              By:

            	 
	 	 	
                  Jonathan
                Godshall, President

            
	
              ACKNOWLEDGED
                AND AGREED:

            	 
	 	 
	
              HOLDER:
Motion Granted; Order filed October 29, 2018

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 18

- 00709

- CV

____________ In the Interest of J.S., a child

On Appeal from the 313th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2017

- 03057J

ORDER
This is an accelerated appeal from a judgment in a parental termination appeal. Appellant’ s brief was due October 26, 2018

. No brief has been filed. On October 29, 2018 appellant filed a request for extension of time to file the brief to November 2, 2018. The motion is granted.

W e order appellant’s appointed counsel Donald Crane , to file appellant’s brief
no later than November 2, 2018. If the brief is not filed by that date, counsel may be required to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court. In addition, the court may require appointment of new counsel due to the failure to timely file appellant’s brief.

PER CURIAM
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 22-1201

___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v. Marcello Lamar lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville

____________ Submitted: July 22, 2022 Filed: July 27, 2022 [Unpublished]

____________ Before BENTON, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM. Marcello Lamar appeals the sentence the district court 1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to possessing with intent to distribute a methamphetamine mixture.

1 The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief under Anders v.

California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the district court’s application of the United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“Guidelines”) provisions for actual methamphetamine and the substantive reasonableness of the sentence. We conclude the district court did not plainly err in determining Lamar’s base offense level based on the undisputed weight of the actual methamphetamine. See United States v. Kirlin , 859 F.3d 539, 543 (8th Cir. 2017) (reviewing district court’s application of Guidelines de novo and its findings of fact for clear error but for plain error if defendant fails to timely object); U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c) cmt. n.B (in case of mixture containing methamphetamine, use offense level determined by entire weight of mixture or by weight of actual methamphetamine, whichever is greater); see also United States v. Aparicio-Leon , 963 F.3d 470, 473 (5th Cir. 2020) (holding no error where district court used undisputed pure methamphetamine weight to determine base offense level despite indictment charging possession of methamphetamine mixture). We also conclude the district court did not impose a substantively unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Feemster , 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (reviewing sentence under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard); United States v. Sharkey , 895 F.3d 1077, 1082 (8th Cir. 2018) (noting sentencing court may, but need not, vary downward based on policy disagreement with Guidelines). Finally, having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw.

______________________________

-2-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000             SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           2,196                   2,196
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   90,695                  90,695
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     60,661                  60,661
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                73,392                  73,392
<PP&E>                                         579,235                 579,235
<DEPRECIATION>                               (344,845)               (344,845)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 461,334                 461,334
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           81,347                  81,347
<BONDS>                                        200,000                 200,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     179,987                 179,987
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   461,334                 461,334
<SALES>                                        113,333                 393,518
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               113,333                 393,518
<CGS>                                          109,087                 345,591
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  109,087                 345,591
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,878                  21,249
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,446                  21,144
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (8,078)                   5,534
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (8,078)                   5,534
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                 (5,180)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (8,078)                     354
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0


</TABLE>
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




     In connection with the Annual Report of Berkeley Technology Limited on Form
10-K for the period ended  December  31, 2003 as filed with the U.S.  Securities
and Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"),  I, Arthur I.  Trueger,  as Executive
Chairman of the registrant,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
by ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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
registrant.



Date:  March 10, 2004                            By:    /s/  Arthur I. Trueger

                                                        Arthur I. Trueger
                                                        Executive Chairman
#### Jacquelyn E. Murad, Plaintiff, v Josephine Russo, Defendant. City of Utica, Appellant, v Josephine Russo, Respondent.

Submitted November 8, 2010;

decided January 11, 2011

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the actions within the meaning of the Constitution.