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


<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       7,741,440
<SECURITIES>                                   606,687
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,118,756
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  8,197,033
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            24,216,988
<PP&E>                                      14,439,784
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,351,404
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              35,523,636
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,839,835
<BONDS>                                      2,976,357
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        58,569
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,670,526
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                35,523,636
<SALES>                                     26,472,183
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            27,068,677
<CGS>                                       21,566,904
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               21,566,904
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,549,813
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             234,578
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                717,382
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (28,760)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            412,837
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   412,837
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
<FN>
Accounts receivable are net of allowance of $354,000 at September 30, 1997.
<FN>
Inventories are net of reserve of $589,000 at September 30, 1997.



</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32**

CERTIFICATION

(PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

(Subsections(a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, UnitedStates Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections(a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United StatesCode), the undersigned officer of Apogee Technology, Inc., a Delawarecorporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge,that:

The quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30,2007 (the “Form 10-QSB”) of the Company fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-QSBfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.
| Dated: August 14, 2007  |   |                                       |   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|                    | /s/    | Herbert M. Stein                           |   |
|                    |   | Herbert M. Stein                           |   |
|                    |   | Chairman of the Board,                     |   |
|                    |   | President, Chief Executive Officer         |
|                    |   | (principal executive officer)              |   |
|                    |   |                                       |   |
|                    |   |                                       |   |
| Dated: August  14, 2007 | /s/    | Paul J. Murphy                             |   |
|                    |   | Paul J. Murphy                             |   |
|                    |   | Chief Financial Officer and Vice President |
|                    |   | Finance (principal financial officer and   |
|                    |   | principal accounting officer)              |

 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by theCompany and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.

----
Exhibit 31(d)

CERTIFICATIONS

 
I, Jay A. Lewis, certify that:  
1.
I have reviewed these annual reports on Form 10-K of Entergy Arkansas, Inc.;  
2.
Based on my knowledge, these reports do not contain any untrue statement of 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 these reports;  
3.
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in these reports, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrants as of, and for, the periods presented in these reports;  
4.
The registrants' other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrants and have:   
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrants, including their consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which these reports are being prepared;   
b)  Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;   
c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants' disclosure controls and procedures and presented in these reports our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by these reports based on such evaluation; and   
d) Disclosed in these reports any change in the registrants' internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants' most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants' internal control over financial reporting; and  
5.
The registrants' other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants' auditors and the audit committee of the registrants' board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):   
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants' ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and   
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants' internal control over financial reporting.

		/s/ Jay A. Lewis
#### In the Matter of Pamela S. Rottman, Respondent, v Robert John Coull, Appellant. (Proceeding Nos. 1 and 3.) In the Matter of Robert Coull, Appellant, v Pamela Rottman, Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2.)

[976 NYS2d 674]

In three related child support proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Greenwald, J.), entered March 12, 2013, which (a) denied his objections to stated portions of an order of the *840same court (Furman, S.M.) dated July 31, 2012, made after a hearing, which, inter alia, denied his petition for a downward modification of his child support obligation, and (b), in effect, denied his objections to an order of the same court (Furman, S.M.) dated August 2, 2012, which directed the entry of a money judgment in favor of the mother and against him in the principal sum of $16,186.69 for child support arrears.

Ordered that the order entered March 12, 2013, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court properly denied the father’s objections to stated portions of the Support Magistrate’s order dated July 31, 2012, which, inter alia, denied his petition for a downward modification of his child support obligation. “To establish entitlement to a downward modification of a child support order, a party has the burden of showing that there has been a substantial change in circumstances” *(Matter of Gansky v Gansky,*103 AD3d 894, 895 [2013]; *see Matter of Kasun v Peluso,*82 AD3d 769, 771 [2011]). Here, the father failed to establish a substantial change in circumstances warranting a downward modification of his child support obligation.

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Mastro, J.E, Lott, Austin and Roman, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 10.14


      FORM OF NOTICE OF GRANT OF STOCK APPRECIATION RIGHT (SAR) AWARD

Name of Employee:

Name of Plan:            Amended and Restated Ashland Inc. Incentive Plan

Number of SAR's:

Grant Price Per SAR:

Date of SAR Grant:

Exercise Schedule:

Expiration Date:

ASHLAND INC ("Ashland") hereby confirms the grant of a Stock Appreciation
Right ("SAR") award ("Award") to the above-named Employee ("Employee").
This Award entitles Employee to receive Ashland stock equal to the excess
of the fair market value of Ashland Common Stock, par value $1.00 per share
("Common Stock") , as determined by the closing price of the Common Stock
as reported on the Composite Tape of the New York Stock Exchange, on the
date the SAR is exercised over the grant price of the Common Stock, with an
aggregate value equal to the excess of the fair market value of one share
of Common Stock over the exercise price specified in such SAR multiplied by
the number of SARs of Common Stock covered by such SAW or portion thereof
which is so surrendered. This Award is granted under, and is subject to,
all the terms and conditions of the Plan. Copies of the Plan and related
Prospectus are available for your review on FirstHand, Ashland's intranet
site. If you would prefer to have a hard copy of either of these documents
mailed to you, please contact Corporate Human Resources at (859) 357-2008.

Please acknowledge your receipt of this Notice of Grant, by signing, dating
and returning the enclosed copy of this Notice of Grant to Kristie Ptasnik,
Corporate Human Resources, LA-lN, on or before _________________, or the
Award will become null and void

ASHLAND INC.


By:_____________________________

DATE:                                          EMPLOYEE:



____________________________________           ______________________________
November 13, 2023 

Memorandum 

To: Bureaus Human Capital Officers

 Bureau Fire Directors

From: Jennifer A. Ackerman

 Director, Office of Human Capital 

 Deputy Chief Human Capital Officer 

Subject: International Travel Requirements for Administratively Determined (AD) Pay 

Plan for Emergency Workers (Casuals)

Effective immediately, the 2023 Administratively Determined (AD) Pay Plan for Emergency 

Workers (Casuals), Section A. paragraph 5, is amended to remove the sentence, “This plan does 

not provide the authority to hire individuals for out-of-country assignments.” ADs may now be 

mobilized under established agreements with international partners. When the AD Pay Plan for 

2024 is issued, the language referenced above will be removed and the remainder of the plan will 

be updated, as necessary.

This memorandum is in response to the increased wildland fire activities occurring on lands 

managed by our international wildland fire management partners. In carrying out international 

commitments to mutual wildland fire management assistance, the Department of the Interior 

(DOI) recognizes the important role that Administratively Determined (AD) workers play in 

supporting wildfire response efforts. 

As of Fiscal Year 2024, Emergency Workers (Casuals) performing their duties outside of the 

United States must meet the following requirements prior to international travel: 

• All AD employees are required to possess a valid United States passport. ADs may 

conduct international travel using a valid personal passport. 

• All AD employees must complete the E-Country Clearance (ECC) prior to travel. 

• The Counter Threat Awareness Training (CTAT) has been waived for emergency 

international wildland firefighter travel.

The serving bureau/office of the employee is required to verify that all internal bureau processes 

and requirements have been met and that background checks and fingerprint clearances for the 

AD have been initiated. The DOI International Travel Clearance Form (DI-1175) is not a 

requirement for AD employees to travel for emergency response activities. The office of 
2

Wildland Fire will work with the servicing bureaus/offices to obtain the deployment data and 

information. 

AD employees provide an invaluable service and a demonstrated commitment to wildland fire 

management. DOI and its partners are grateful for the support from the members of the wildland 

fire communities. 

Any Department employee or employee representative seeking further information concerning 

this memorandum may contact their respective servicing HRO. Bureau Headquarters Human 

Resources staff may contact DOI_Office_of_Human_Resources@ios.doi.gov.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

RICHARD JENNINGS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-609

[August 5, 2021]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Ernest A. Kollra, Jr., 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 15-1774-CF-10A.

Richard Jennings, Bristol, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CONNER, C.J., LEVINE and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Opinion issued July 7, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-16-00190-CV

———————————

ERIC W. NORRIS, Appellant

V.

HOME CARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 281st District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2014-41164

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Eric W. Norris, proceeding pro se, has neither paid the required 

filing fee nor established indigence for purposes of appellate costs. See TEX. R. APP. 

P. 5, 20.1; see also TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §§ 51.207, 51.208, 51.941(a), 101.041(1) 

(West Supp. 2015), § 101.0411 (West Supp. 2015); Order, Fees Charged in the 
2

Supreme Court, in Civil Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial 

Panel on Multi-District Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 15-9158 (Tex. Aug. 28, 2015). 

After being notified by the Clerk of this Court on March 24, 2016, that this appeal 

was subject to dismissal for failure to pay the required fee, appellant did not timely 

respond. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 42.3(b), (c).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for nonpayment of all required fees and 

for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 42.3(b), (c).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Brown, and Huddle.
Exhibit
10.60  FRESH CHOICE, INC.  2003HOME OFFICE INCENTIVE PLAN  Purpose:To reward Home
Office management for accomplishments resulting in targeted year-end profit for
the Company.  Eligibility:Officers andDepartment
Managers designated as Directors of the Company who are actively employed by
Fresh Choice on December 30, 2002. Those hired after December 30, 2002 may
participate at a pro-rated amount unless other arrangements have been made.
Participants must be employed by Fresh Choice on the date final incentive pay
calculations are completed; incentive pay is not earned until that date. Participants
are only eligible to receive incentive pay if the Company achieves more than
80% of Plan. 2003 targets include the expense of this program.  Plan
Year:The plan
begins on December 30, 2002 and ends on December 28, 2003.  Incentive
Pay Available:The
incentive pay available is a percentage of the participants base salary as of
December 30, 2002 at Plan plus 20% of before tax earnings above plan. The pool
is allocated among the designated participants based on a predetermined
percentage amount. Actual bonus paid is interpolated according to actual
results.  Distribution
of Incentive Pay:Incentive
pay will be paid as soon as practical after year end financials are audited and
provided that the Company met or exceeded defined levels of performance.  Plan
Intent:Fresh
Choice intends to maintain the plan under the terms listed above. However,
Fresh Choice reserves the right to modify or terminate the plan at any time.
<PAGE>

                                                                Exhibit 24.3

                                 CERTIFICATE
                                 -----------

         I, Steven L. Frey, hereby certify that I am the Secretary of
Angelica Corporation, a Missouri corporation, with its principal office in
the County of St. Louis, State of Missouri, and as such in charge of its
corporate records, including minutes of meetings of its shareholders and
Board of Directors.

         I further certify that the Board of Directors of the Company
adopted the following resolutions under date of February 24, 2004, which
resolutions have not since been amended or rescinded and are in full force
and effect at the date hereof:

                  "FURTHER RESOLVED, That Stephen M. O'Hara, Steven L. Frey
         and James W. Shaffer, or any of them, are hereby authorized to do
         all acts and things and to execute any and all instruments on
         behalf of the Company, including the execution of the Company's
         Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 31,
         2004, or any amendment thereto, relating to compliance with the
         reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
         which said attorneys, or any of them, may deem necessary or
         advisable to enable the Company to comply with the Securities
         Exchange Act of 1934, and any rules, regulations and requirements
         of the Securities and Exchange Commission in respect thereof;

                  FURTHER RESOLVED, That this Board of Directors does
         approve the execution by the directors and officers of the Company
         or any of them, of a Power of Attorney in favor of Stephen M.
         O'Hara, Steven L. Frey and James W. Shaffer, or any of them (with
         power of substitution in each), empowering such attorneys, or any
         of them, to do all acts and things and to execute any and all
         instruments on behalf of such directors and officers, including the
         execution of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
         fiscal year ended January 31, 2004 and all amendments thereto,
         which such attorneys, or any of them, may deem necessary or
         advisable to enable the Company to comply with the reporting
         requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission in respect
         thereof."

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the
seal of the said corporation this 15th day of April, 2004.

                                                   /s/ Steven L. Frey
                                                   -----------------------
                                                   Steven L. Frey
                                                   Secretary

 [SEAL]
#### Jose Gabriel MARTINEZ-MARTINEZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-70202.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*704Submitted Dec. 4, 2006.*

Filed Dec. 8, 2006.

Jose Gabriel Martinez-Martinez, Anaheim, CA, for Petitioner.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Kurt B. Larson, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Jose Gabriel Martinez-Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming an immigration judge’s denial of his application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, *Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft,*381 F.3d 847, 850-51 (9th Cir.2004), and deny the petition for review.

Martinez-Martinez testified to the correctness of his cancellation application, which indicated that he had departed the United States in 1994 and did not return until 1999. Substantial evidence therefore supports the agency’s conclusion that Martinez-Martinez failed to maintain continuous physical presence for the requisite period. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(2) (stating that an applicant for cancellation of removal fails to maintain continuous physical presence if he “has departed from the United States for any period in excess of 90 days”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.