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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                      12,935,907
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,124,627
<ALLOWANCES>                                   665,030
<INVENTORY>                                  1,009,029
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,456,890
<PP&E>                                       1,865,398
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              20,824,562
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,867,830
<BONDS>                                         44,891
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       684,579
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,251,408
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                20,824,562
<SALES>                                     23,382,089
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            37,556,071
<CGS>                                        7,155,766
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,451,473
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,020,350
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             421,622
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,340,423
<INCOME-TAX>                                   534,176
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,806,247
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,806,247
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.62
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.62
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                          Exhibit 10(iii)A(4)(i)


                                   APPENDIX E
                     (as amended and restated June 29, 2001)


E.1      Eligible Individual        Brock A. Hattox

E.2      Effective Date Pursuant to Section 2.1(b), the Eligible Individual's
date of participation shall be September 18, 1996.

E.3      Special Provisions The following special provision shall apply to the
Eligible Individual's participation in the Plan.

         (a) The Eligible Individual will qualify as a Vested Terminee if he
completes 5 years of employment with NSI from September 9, 1996 to his
Termination Date.

         (b) If the Eligible Individual terminates employment with NSI after
attaining age 55, the Eligible Individual shall be eligible for Early Retirement
under Sections 1.1(a)(2) and 3.3, and his benefit will be determined as if he
had completed an additional five (5) years of service (including Credited
Service and Eligible Service, but not to exceed a total of 20 years) and was
five (5) years older (but not to exceed age 65).

Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Appendix E, the Eligible
Individual's benefits under the Plan shall be determined in the same manner as
for other participants.
@misc{1212516,
  author = {Scott Rose},
  title = {Planning a Zero Trust Architecture: A Starting Guide for Federal Administrators},
  year = {2022},
  month = {2022-05-06 04:05:00},
  publisher = {OTHER, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=934243},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.CSWP.20},
  language = {en},
}
@article{1211171,
  author = {Daniel Barker and James A. Fedchak and Jacek Klos and Julia Scherschligt and Abrar Sheikh and Eite Tiesinga and Stephen Eckel},
  title = {Accurate measurement of the loss rate of cold atoms due to background gas collisions for the quantum-based cold atom vacuum standard},
  year = {2023},
  number = {5},
  month = {2023-08-01 04:08:00},
  publisher = {AVS Quantum Science},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=936310},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.1116/5.0147686},
  language = {en},
}
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**SECTION      1350 CERTIFICATIONS**

|         |                                                   |                                          |
|--------------|--------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
|         |                                                        |
|    |                                              |                                     |
|         |                                                        | /s/ F. Jacob                Cherian |
|         | F. Jacob                Cherian                   |
|         | President                  and Chief Executive Officer |
|         | (Principal                Executive Officer)           |

|         |                                                                                                     |                                 |
|--------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
|         |                                                                                                          |
|    |                                                                                                |                            |
|         |                                                                                                          | /s/ Suhel                Kanuga |
|         | Suhel                Kanuga                                                                              |
|         | Executive                Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and                Secretary |
|         | (Principal                Financial Officer)                                                             |
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                  Jan-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                    Dec-31-1999
<CASH>                          354,860
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   6,450,877
<ALLOWANCES>                    261,452
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                0
<PP&E>                          0
<DEPRECIATION>                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  7,436,868
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           0
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           13,068
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        0
<OTHER-SE>                      7,423,800
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    7,436,868
<SALES>                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                785,209
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   113,853
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                193,427
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 477,929
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             477,929
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    477,929
<EPS-BASIC>                     .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                   .00




</TABLE>
# Result 2.3
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-15-00242-CR 

ROCKY RODRIGUEZ, APPELLANT 

 

V. 

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 

On Appeal from the 137th District Court 

Lubbock County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 2007-415,693, Honorable John J. "Trey" McClendon III, Presiding 

 

July 17, 2015 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. 

Rocky Rodriguez, appellant, attempts to appeal his convictions for aggravated 

assault with a deadly weapon. The convictions were rendered on May 16, 2007, while 

his notice of appeal was filed on May 19, 2015. We dismiss for want of jurisdiction.

To be timely, a notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after the day the 

sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, or after the day the trial court enters 

an appealable order; or within ninety days after the day sentence is imposed or 

suspended in open court if a motion for new trial is filed. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a). The 
2

judgments were entered in this cause on February 29, 2008. Appellant’s May 2015 

notice of appeal fell years beyond that deadline. 

A timely filed notice of appeal is essential to invoke our appellate jurisdiction. 

Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). If it is untimely, the Court

can take no action other than to dismiss the proceeding. Id. at 523. Because appellant's 

notice of appeal was untimely filed, we have no jurisdiction over the matter and dismiss 

the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.1

Per Curiam

Do not publish.

 

1

The appropriate vehicle for seeking an out of time appeal from a final felony conviction is by writ 

of habeas corpus pursuant to Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE 

CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2013).
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 this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Susser Holdings Corporation (the Company) for the nine months ended
September 28, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Sam L. Susser, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 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, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |                                      
|---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: November 7, 2008 |  | /s/ Sam L. Susser                    
|                       |  | Sam L. Susser                        
|                       |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order
Lansing, Michigan
December 27, 2005

129184

ERIK D. LITTLE, Plaintiff,

v
ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION, Defendant.

________________ _______________ __________/ SC: 129184 AGC: 2111/04 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

On order of the Court, th e complaint for superintendi ng control is considered. Relief is DENIED, because the Court is not p ersuaded that it should grant the requested relief.

s1219 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 27, 2005
Clerk
2010 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

11-16-2010

Coastal Outdoor Advertising Gr v. Township of

East Hanover

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 09-3242

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2010

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2010 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Coastal Outdoor Advertising Gr v. Township of East Hanover" (2010). 2010 Decisions. Paper 254.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2010/254
NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 09-3242

_____________

COASTAL OUTDOOR ADVERTISING GROUP, LLC,

 Appellant

v.

TOWNSHIP OF EAST HANOVER, NEW JERSEY

On Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of New Jersey

No. 2-07-cv-04330

District Judge: Honorable Katharine S. Hayden

Submitted Pursuant to

Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

September 20, 2010

Before: McKee, Chief Judge, Ambro and Chagares, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the slip opinion filed in this case on October 

14, 2010, be amended as follows:

On pages 1-2, the sentence, “We are asked to review the district 

court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Coastal Outdoor Advertising 

Group in its action against East Hanover Township,” should be changed to 

read as follows: “We are asked to review the district court’s grant of 
summary judgment in favor of the Township of East Hanover in an action

brought by Coastal Outdoor Advertising Group, L.L.C.”

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT,

/s/ Theodore M. McKee

Chief Judge

DATED: November 16, 2010
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

CLEMENTE D. GRANT,

 Appellant,

v.

RAYMUNDO ESPIRITU AND DAVID 

BARNES,

 Appellees.

§

§

§

§

§

§ 

No. 08-13-00247-CV

Appeal from the

County Court at Law Number One

of Tarrant County, Texas 

(TC# 2011-004353-1) 

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the 

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. We further order that 

Appellees recover from Appellant all costs in this Court. This decision shall be certified below 

for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2015.

STEVEN L. HUGHES, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
IV 

House Calendar No. 44 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 591 

[Report No. 116–218] 

Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 54) relating 

to a national emergency declared by the President on February 15, 2019. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2019 

Mr. MORELLE, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 

54) relating to a national emergency declared by the 

President on February 15, 2019. 

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it 

2 shall be in order to consider in the House the joint resolu3 tion (S.J. Res. 54) relating to a national emergency de4 clared by the President on February 15, 2019. All points 

5 of order against consideration of the joint resolution are 

6 waived. The joint resolution shall be considered as read. 

7 All points of order against provisions in the joint resoluVerDate Sep 11 2014 20:19 Sep 25, 2019 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR591.RH HR591

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 591 RH 

1 tion are waived. The previous question shall be considered 

2 as ordered on the joint resolution and on any amendment 

3 thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: 

4 (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by 

5 the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee 

6 on Transportation and Infrastructure; and (2) one motion 

7 to commit. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
House Calendar No. 44 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 591 

[Report No. 116–218] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the joint resolution 

declared by the President on February 15, 2019. (S.J. Res. 54) relating to a national emergency 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2019 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
#### Adele Seubert, Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v John D. Marchioni et al., Respondents.

[978 NYS2d 520]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Evelyn Frazee, J.), entered August 13, 2012. The order granted the motion of defendants for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

*1371It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this legal malpractice action seeking damages based on defendants’ representation of them in their purchase of a membership interest in a limited liability company. Defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and Supreme Court granted the motion. We affirm. In order to establish their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, defendants had to present evidence in admissible form establishing that plaintiffs are “unable to prove at least one necessary element of the legal malpractice action” *(Giardina v Lippes,*77 AD3d 1290, 1291 [2010], *lv denied*16 NY3d 702 [2011]; *see Ginther v Rosenhoch,*57 AD3d 1414, 1414-1415 [2008], *lv denied*12 NY3d 707 [2009]), e.g., “ ‘that the defendant attorney failed to exercise that degree of care, skill, and diligence commonly possessed by a member of the legal community’ ” *(Phillips v Moran & Kufta, P.C.,*53 AD3d 1044, 1044-1045 [2008]; *see generally McCoy v Feinman,*99 NY2d 295, 301 [2002]; *Williams v Kublick,*302 AD2d 961, 961 [2003]). Here, defendants met their initial burden on the motion with respect to that element *(see generally Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). Inasmuch as plaintiffs did not submit expert testimony or, indeed, any opposition to defendants’ motion, they failed to raise an issue of fact concerning defendants’ compliance with the applicable standard of care *(see Merlin Biomed Asset Mgt., LLC v Wolf Block Schorr & Solis-Cohen LLP,*23 AD3d 243, 243 [2005]; *see also Zeller v Copps,*294 AD2d 683, 684-685 [2002]). Plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are raised for the first time on appeal and thus are not properly before us *(see Ciesinski v Town of Aurora,*202 AD2d 984, 985 [1994]). Present — Smith, J.B, Fahey, Lindley, Valentino and Whalen, JJ.
CANTRELL e CANTRELL 

Carol A. Cantrell 

Managing Member 

Board Certified-Tax Law 

Estate Planning and Probate Law 

Texas Board of Legal Specialization 

Clerk of the First Court of Appeals 

Houston, TX 77002 

July 16, 2015 

Re: Cause No. 01-15-00471-CV, In Re Daniel W. Warren 

Dear Clerk: 

3700 Buffalo Speedway, Suite 520 

Houston, Texas 77098 

main 1713) 333-0555 

fax 1713) 333-0550 

cctaxlaw.com 

Please note that Relator intends to file a Reply Brief in the above referenced Cause No. 

01-15-00471-CV, In Re Danie!TY. Warren on Monday July 20, 2015. Relator's Reply Brief 

will respond to the points raised in the Real Party in Interest's Response Brief, which was 

filed on Friday, July 10, 2015. 

Sincerely, 

Carol 

~~ A. Cantrell 

ACCEPTED

01-15-00471-CV

FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

7/16/2015 5:13:38 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 7/16/2015 5:13:38 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Michael S. Gross, Chief Executive
Officer and Principal Financial Officer of Marathon Acquisition Corp., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form
10-Q of Marathon Acquisition Corp.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information 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. I am responsible for establishing 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 our
supervision, 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 the registrant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 the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and

5. 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 the registrants 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 registrants 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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Dated this 15thday of May, 2007.



|    |  |                                                                         
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/ Michael S. Gross                                                    
|    |  | Michael S. Gross Chief Executive Officer
and Principal Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

WESTERN DISTRICT 

GEORGE ROWANN, 

 Petitioner 

 v. 

ERIE COUNTY COURT OF COMMON 

PLEAS IN THE SIXTH JUDICIAL 

DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 34 WM 2015 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 22nd day of July, 2015, the Application for Leave to File Original 

Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED.