alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"agency":"NIGC","generated":"2021-01-22 16:13:44","items":[{"id":"1","parent":null,"text":"Reporting Quarter","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-year","label":"Reporting Year","options":[{"label":"2011","value":"2011"},{"label":"2012","value":"2012"},{"label":"2013","value":"2013"},{"label":"2014","value":"2014"},{"label":"2015","value":"2015"},{"label":"2016","value":"2016"},{"label":"2017","value":"2017"},{"label":"2018","value":"2018"},{"label":"2019","value":"2019"},{"label":"2020","value":"2020"}],"value":"2021"},{"type":"select","name":"2-1-quarter","label":"Reporting Quarter","options":[{"label":"Q1","value":"Q1"},{"label":"Q2","value":"Q2"},{"label":"Q3","value":"Q3"},{"label":"Q4","value":"Q4"}],"value":"Q1"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-1","parent":"1","text":"Ten Oldest Requests","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-1-oldest","label":"Ten Oldest","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"3"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-3","parent":"1","text":"","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-3-closed","label":"Ten Oldest Closed","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"1"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-2","parent":"1","text":"FOIA Requests Information","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/08\/21","fields":[{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-component","label":"Component","options":[],"value":["NIGC"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-received","label":"Received","options":[],"value":["16"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-processed","label":"Processed","options":[],"value":["17"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-backlog","label":"Backlog","options":[],"value":["4"]}],"multiple":true}],"year":"2021","quarter":"Q1"}
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 9, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 27353]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13470]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,863]


Watry Industries, Inc., Sheboygan, WI; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on April 29, 2009, in response to a 
petition filed by a Wisconsin State, One-Stop Operator on behalf of 
workers of Watry Industries, Inc., Sheboygan, Wisconsin.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of May 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-13470 Filed 6-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM MARCH 31,
1997 FORM 10-QSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         244,197
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  354,571
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               898,767
<PP&E>                                         969,989
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,877,319
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,938,397
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,883,788
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        50,655
<OTHER-SE>                                  16,901,437
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,938,397
<SALES>                                        160,175
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               160,175
<CGS>                                          109,053
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  455,323
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               582,498
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              48,134
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (877,646)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (878,446)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (878,446)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
*Wednesday, May 21, 1997*

MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

96-2495.

#### In re Judicial Campaign Complaint Against Hildebrandt.

This matter is pending before the court' upon respondent’s notice of appeal from the January 27, 1997 order of the Commission of Judges. Upon consideration of respondent’s application for dismissal of his appeal,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the application for dismissal be, and hereby is, granted.

ACCORDINGLY, IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that respondent’s appeal be, and hereby is, dismissed.
**EXHIBIT 23**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 033-57137, 333-89807, 333-87744, 333-104495, 333-102590,333-11549 and 333-112522; Form S-3 Nos. 333-104530, 333-107631, and 333-108610; and Form S-4 No. 333-60448) of K2 Inc. and the related Prospectus of our report dated February 15, 2004, with respect to the consolidated financial statements andschedule of K2 Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K/A Amendment No. 2), for the year ended December 31, 2003. 

 

ERNST & YOUNG LLP 

 

San Diego, California 

June 11, 2004
NUMBER 13-14-00557-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

DAVID MARTINEZ JR., Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 107th District Court 

of Cameron County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, David Martinez Jr., attempted to perfect an appeal from a conviction for 

aggravated assault. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

This Court’s appellate jurisdiction in a criminal case is invoked by a timely filed 

notice of appeal. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Absent 

a timely filed notice of appeal, a court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to address the 
2

merits of the appeal and can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal for want of 

jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).

The trial court imposed sentence in this matter on March 28, 2013. Appellant filed 

an “Out of Time Notice of Appeal” on September 23, 2014. On September 26, 2014, the 

Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared that this Court does not have 

jurisdiction and that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect was not corrected within

ten days from the date of receipt of the Court’s directive. Appellant has not filed a 

response to the Court’s directive.

Unless a motion for new trial has been timely filed, a notice of appeal must be filed 

within thirty days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, or after 

the day the trial court enters an appealable order. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). Where a 

timely motion for new trial has been filed, the notice of appeal must be filed within ninety 

days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court. See id. 26.2(a)(2). 

The time within which to file the notice may be enlarged if, within fifteen days after the

deadline for filing the notice, the party files the notice of appeal and a motion complying 

with Rule 10.5(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. 26.3.

Appellant’s notice of appeal, filed more than sixteen months after sentence was 

imposed, was untimely, and accordingly, we lack jurisdiction over the appeal. See 

Slaton, 981 S.W.2d at 210. Appellant may be entitled to an out-of-time appeal by filing 

a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus returnable to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals; 

however, the availability of that remedy is beyond the jurisdiction of this Court. See TEX.

CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. Art. 11.07, § 3(a) (Vernon 2005); see also Ex parte Garcia, 988 

S.W.2d 240 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999).
3

The appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. All pending motions 

are likewise DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 

Delivered and filed the 

6th day of November, 2014.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Kevin Brawner, certify that:

      1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of
AssuranceAmerica Corporation.;

      2.    Based on my knowledge, this annual report does 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 this
annual report;

      3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual 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 annual report;

      4.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

            a)    designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is being prepared;

            b)    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this annual
report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

            c)    presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

      5.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent function):

            a)    all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

            b)    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls; and

      6.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in
this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: March 30, 2005

/s/ Kevin Brawner
-----------------------
Kevin Brawner
Controller
#### THOMAS v. MARTIN.

No. 1281.

United States District Court E. D. Tennessee, S. D.

Jan. 26, 1949.

Berke & Fleming, of Chattanooga, Tenn., for plaintiff.

Strang, Fletcher & Carriger, of Chattanooga, Tenn., for defendant.

DARR, District Judge.

The defendant, Robert W. Martin, d/b/a Martin Motor Express Company, has a motion for summary judgment.

The plaintiff’s initial pleading has allegations of negligence which clearly amount to a cause of action against this defendant. This defendant has made answer and denied the allegations of negligence. To support the motion affidavits of several persons have been filed. These affidavits are proof of the averments in the answer, and if found to be true would defeat the plaintiff’s claim upon a trial of the case.

On principle, which is sustained by numerous cases, the extraordinary relief by summary judgment cannot be granted unless it very clearly appears from the whole record that “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”

If there be a substantial issue raised by the pleadings as distinguished from formal issues raised thereby, a motion for summary judgment cannot be sustained even though affidavits be submitted in denial of the substantial issue. The point to be determined on such motion is whether there is a real issue existing and in doing this all doubts are resolved against the movant. Walling v. Fairmont Creamery Co., 8 Cir., 139 F.2d 318.

Affidavits making denial of allegations of negligence clearly set forth in a complaint are evidence that there exists an issue of fact. Under such circumstances a motion for summary judgment cannot be granted. Robinson v. Waterman Steamship Co., et al., D.C., 8 F.R.D. 155.

The motion is overruled.

Order accordingly.
EX-10.2


  Exhibit 10.2

  CERTAIN INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED BY [***],

  HAS BEEN OMITTED BECAUSE IT IS BOTH NOT MATERIAL AND IS THE TYPE

  THAT THE REGISTRANT TREATS AS PRIVATE OR CONFIDENTIAL.

   

  AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CELL LINE LICENSE AGREEMENT

   

  This Amendment No. 2 (this “Amendment”) is entered into between Silverback Therapeutics, Inc. (“Licensee”) and WuXi Biologics (Hong Kong) Limited (“WuXi Biologics”), effective as of the date of the last signature hereto, and amends, as set forth herein, the Cell Line License Agreement (the “CLLA”), effective as of 11 October, 2019 entered into between Licensee and WuXi Biologics. Each of WuXi Biologics and Licensee are referred to from time to time as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties”. All terms used but not otherwise defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings accorded to them in the CLLA.

  1.The Parties hereby agree to amend the Appendix I pursuant to Section 1.2 of the CLLA as follows:


   

  List of Service Agreements for Licensee Products

   

  				
	 
	Licensee
Product Name
	Contract(e.g., Master Service
Agreements)
	Effective Date

	1
	[***]
	[***]
	[***]

	 
	 
	[***]
	[***]

	2
	[***]
	[***]
	[***]

	 
	 
	[***]
	[***]

	3
	[***]
	[***]
	[***]

	 
	 
	[***]
	[***]

	4
	 
	 
	 



   

  2.Miscellaneous.


  a.Ratification of Agreement. The CLLA is in all respects ratified and confirmed by the Parties.


  b.One Instrument. The CLLA and this Amendment shall be read, taken and construed as one and the same document.


  c.Counterpart Signatures. This Amendment may be signed by the Parties in multiple, separate counterparts which when taken together shall constitute one and the same document. This Agreement may be signed by electronic signature via a recognized provider (e.g., DocuSign or Adobe) or “.pdf” file . and such signature shall be deemed to bind each Party hereto as if they were original.


   

  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have signed this Amendment through their duly authorized representatives.

   

  						
	Wuxi Biologics (Hong Kong) Limited
	 
	 
	Silverback Therapeutics, Inc.

	Signature:
	/s/ Chris Chen
	 
	 
	Signature:
	/s/ Sateesh Natarajan

	Name:
	Chris Chen
	 
	 
	Name:
	Sateesh Natarajan

	Title:
	CEO
	 
	 
	Title:
	SVP,CMC

	Date:
	5/4/2022
	 
	 
	Date:
	5/3/2022
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                          FISCAL YEARS ENDED
                                                                DECEMBER
                                                       ------------------------
                                                        1996     1995      1994
                                                       -------------------------
<S>                                                     <C>      <C>      <C>
Amounts in thousands, except per share

Primary
     Average common shares outstanding                   7,190    7,090    7,062
     Net earnings                                       $6,525   $4,731   $3,431
     Net earnings per common share outstanding (a)      $  .91   $  .67   $  .49

Fully-diluted
     Average common shares outstanding                   7,190    7,090      (c)
     Common stock equivalents (b)                          415      240
                                                        ------   ------
     Fully-diluted average common shares outstanding     7,605    7,330
     Net earnings                                       $6,525   $4,731
     Net earnings per common share-fully diluted        $  .86   $  .65


<FN>

(a)    Net earnings per common share outstanding is not materially affected by
       common stock equivalents used in the determination of primary earnings
       per share.

(b)    Represents shares issuable upon the assumed exercise of outstanding stock
       options determined under the "treasury stock" method.

(c)    Outstanding stock options were anti-dilutive in 1994.
</TABLE>


                                       47
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains financial information extracted from financial statements
of HEARx Ltd. and is qualified in its entirety by references to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-26-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-27-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-26-1998
<CASH>                                       1,534,577
<SECURITIES>                                 7,778,133
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,197,941
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (336,081)
<INVENTORY>                                  1,600,920
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            14,775,490
<PP&E>                                      14,412,172
<DEPRECIATION>                             (5,663,095)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              24,993,314
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,824,917
<BONDS>                                        171,897
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      6,815
<COMMON>                                    10,085,555
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,904,130
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                24,993,314
<SALES>                                     13,910,905
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            13,910,905
<CGS>                                        3,993,738
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               14,077,234
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,160,067)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,160,067)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                202,635
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,362,720)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  ($0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  ($0.04)
        

</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 Quarterly Report of Heavenly Hot Dogs, Inc. (the ACompany@) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Elwood Shepard, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of 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 result of operations of the Company.  Date: November 8, 2006 By: /s/  Elwood Shepard Elwood Shepard Chief Executive Officer Chief Financial Officer