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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS, STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY AND
CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                       5,799,000
<SECURITIES>                                    73,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               20,231,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,141,000
<INVENTORY>                                 21,835,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            48,948,000
<PP&E>                                      38,863,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              21,446,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              78,476,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       39,350,000
<BONDS>                                      5,411,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,000
<COMMON>                                     1,098,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  31,771,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                78,476,000
<SALES>                                    115,912,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           115,912,000
<CGS>                                       84,215,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               84,215,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               225,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,360,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (15,427,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   182,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (15,609,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (15,609,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.97)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Unassociated Document








Exhibit 10.43


 


PINNACLE FINANCIAL PARTNERS, INC.


Named Executive Officer Compensation Summary







The following table sets forth the current base salaries paid to the Chief Executive Officer and the four other named executive officers of Pinnacle Financial Partners, Inc. (the “Company”).








	
Executive Officer

	 	
Current Base 


Salary

	 
	  	 	 	 
	
M. Terry Turner – CEO

	 	$	733,000	 
	
Robert A. McCabe, Jr. - Chairman of the Board

	 	$	696,000	 
	
Hugh M. Queener – CAO

	 	$	352,000	 
	
Harold R. Carpenter – CFO

	 	$	352,000	 
	
Joseph Harvey White - Chief Credit Officer

	 	$	265,000	 





 


In addition to their cash base salaries, these executive officers are also eligible to:


 



	
  

	
·

	
Receive cash bonuses under the Company’s 2013 Cash Incentive Plan;








	
  

	
·

	
Participate in the Company's equity incentive programs, which currently involves the award of performance-based restricted stock units pursuant to the Company's 2004 Equity Incentive Plan; and








	
  

	
·

	
Participate in the Company's broad-based benefit programs generally available to its employees, including health, disability and life insurance programs and the Company’s 401k plan.







 


The foregoing information is summary in nature.  Additional information regarding the named executive officer compensation will be provided in the Company’s proxy statement to be filed in connection with the 2013 annual meeting of the Company’s stockholders.
##### 



Exhibit 31.2 PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICERS CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Cheryl W. Farmer, certify that:  1.
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Greyhound Lines, Inc. and Subsidiaries;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.
    The registrants 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)) 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; andc)
    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 that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and  5.
    The registrants other certifying officers and 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 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;
andb)
    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. Date: March 31, 2005 /s/ Cheryl W. FarmerCheryl W. Farmer, Senior Vice President  Finance and Treasurer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-1353

ROBERT LEE DORSEY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

NEW HANOVER COUNTY, BOARD OF EDUCATION; NEW

HANOVER COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT; JOHN MORRIS,

JR., Superintendent; GEORGE W. HANCE, JR.,

Assistant Superintendent; SAFFO CONTRACTORS,

INCORPORATED; NICOLAS A. SAFFO; PETE VINSON;

WILEY ELLER, SR.; DOES AND ROES 1-25,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District

Judge. (CA-01-187-7-F(1))

Submitted: November 19, 2002 Decided: December 16, 2002

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Lee Dorsey, Appellant Pro Se. Wayne Albert Bullard, Stacey

Leigh Fuller, HOGUE, HILL, JONES, NASH & LYNCH, Wilmington, North

Carolina; Ann S. Estridge, CRANFILL, SUMNER & HARTZOG, L.L.P.,

Raleigh, North Carolina; Robert White Johnson, Anna Johnson

Averitt, JOHNSON & LAMBETH, Wilmington, North Carolina; Kenneth

Alexander Soo, Kara L. Grice, THARRINGTON SMITH, L.L.P., Raleigh,

North Carolina, for Appellees.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Robert Lee Dorsey appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his complaint for failure to respond to Defendants’

motions to dismiss. We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Dorsey v. New

Hanover County, Bd. of Educ., No. CA-01-187-7-F(1) (E.D.N.C. Feb.

22, 2002). Based on this court’s informal briefing order of July

30, 2002, and Dorsey’s compliance with that order, we deny

Appellees’ motion to dismiss for want of prosecution. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 7723** 

ANDRE MAZYCK , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,
v. WARDEN KATHLEEN GREEN; JOE CUMMONS , Defendants

- Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore
. Benson Everett Legg , District Judge. ( 1:11

- cv - 00557

- BEL )

Submitted : April 19, 2012 Decided: April 25, 2012

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Andre Mazyck, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane

- Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Andre Mazyck appeals the district court ’ s order de nying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (200 6 ) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Mazyck v. Green , No. 1:11

- cv - 00557

- BEL (D. Md. Dec. 9, 2011). We dispe nse with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.

AFFIRMED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22
- 0529 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JASSIE LAYDELL WESTERMAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for an extension and good cause appearing. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Appellant is given an extension of time until June 5, 2024, to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief. No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 2 2024

05/02/2024

Case Number: DA 22-0529
Order filed, May 30, 2019.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-19-00406-CV

____________

EBUBEKIR YAHSI, Appellant

V.

VISOR MUHENDISLIK INSAAT GIDA VE MEKANIK TAAHHUT 

TICARET LIMITED SIRKETI AND VIZOR INTERNATIONAL, LLC, 

Appellee

On Appeal from the 269th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2016-88361

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due May 28, 2019. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. 

The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not 

been filed timely, we issue the following order.
We order Kathleen Keese, the official court reporter, to file the record in 

this appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 824 

Expressing support for designation of the week beginning February 2, 2020, 

as ‘‘National Tribal Colleges and Universities Week’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 30, 2020 

Mr. O’HALLERAN (for himself, Mr. COLE, Mr. YOUNG, Mr. KILMER, Mr. 

ARMSTRONG, Mr. LUJA ́N, Ms. HAALAND, Mr. GALLEGO, Mr. PETERSON, 

and Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for designation of the week beginning 

February 2, 2020, as ‘‘National Tribal Colleges and Universities Week’’. 

Whereas there are 37 Tribal Colleges and Universities operating on more than 75 campuses in 16 States; 

Whereas Tribal Colleges and Universities are tribally chartered or federally chartered institutions of higher education and therefore have a unique relationship with the 

Federal Government; 

Whereas Tribal Colleges and Universities serve students from 

more than 230 federally recognized Indian Tribes; 

Whereas Tribal Colleges and Universities offer students access to knowledge and skills grounded in cultural tradiVerDate Sep 11 2014 20:49 Jan 30, 2020 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR824.IH HR824

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 824 IH 

tions and values, including indigenous languages, 

which— 

(1) enhances Indian communities; and 

(2) enriches the United States as a Nation; 

Whereas Tribal Colleges and Universities provide access to 

high-quality postsecondary educational opportunities 

for— 

(1) American Indians; 

(2) Alaska Natives; and 

(3) other individuals that live in some of the most 

isolated and economically depressed areas in the United 

States; 

Whereas Tribal Colleges and Universities are accredited institutions of higher education that prepare students to succeed in the global and highly competitive workforce; 

Whereas Tribal Colleges and Universities have open enrollment policies, and approximately 15 percent of the students at Tribal Colleges and Universities are non-Indian 

individuals; and 

Whereas the collective mission and the considerable achievements of Tribal Colleges and Universities deserve national recognition: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the designation of ‘‘National Trib3 al Colleges and Universities Week’’; and 

4 (2) calls on the people of the United States and 

5 interested groups to observe National Tribal Colleges 

6 and Universities Week with appropriate activities 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 824 IH 

1 and programs to demonstrate support for Tribal 

2 Colleges and Universities. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
August 31, 2015

Jeffrey D. Kyle, Clerk Court of Appeals Third District of Texas P.O. Box 12547 Austin, Texas 78711

- 2547

Re: Cause No. 03

- 13

- 00370

- CV; The State Board for Educator Certification v. Erasmo Montalvo ; In the Court of Appeals for the Third District of Texas at Austin

Dear Mr. Kyle:

Please be advised that the undersigned counsel intends to argue this case, now reset for October 7, 2015, at 1:30 p.m., before the Court.

Sincerely,

/s/ Ellen Sameth ELLEN M. SAMETH Assistant Attorney General State Bar No. 17555550 OFFICE OF THE TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE LAW DIVISION P.O. Box 12548 Austin, Texas 78711

- 2548 Telephone: (512) 936

- 1838 Facsimile: (512) 457

- 4608 Ellen.sameth@texasattorneyg eneral.gov Attorney for Appellant

Cc: Mr. Mark W. Robinett Brim, Arnett & Robinett, P.C. Via e

- mail

Pos t Of fic e Bo x 12548

, Austin

, T exa s 7 8 7 1 1 - 2 5 4 8 • ( 5 1 2 ) 4 6 3 - 2 1 0 0 • ww w .texasatto r neygeneral.go v ACCEPTED 03-13-00370-CV 6718918 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/31/2015 10:39:47 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK
# covid_table35_c46_state
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 130 (Thursday, July 9, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 32876]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16259]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meetings of the Connecticut Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a briefing meeting and 
a planning meeting of the Connecticut Advisory Committee to the 
Commission will convene at 10:30 a.m. on Thursday, July 23, 2009 at the 
University of Connecticut, School of Law, Faculty Lounge, 55 Elizabeth 
Street, Hartford, Connecticut 06105. The purpose of the briefing 
meeting is to hear about anti-bias in the state. The purpose of the 
planning meeting is to plan a briefing on high school graduation rates.
    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the 
comments must be received in the regional office by August 21, 2009. 
The address is Eastern Regional Office, 624 9th St., NW., Washington, 
DC 20425. Persons wishing to email their comments, or who desire 
additional information should contact Alfreda Greene, Secretary, at 
202-376-7533 or by e-mail to: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3e5b4c517e4b4d5d5d4c10595148"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1d786f725d686e7e7e6f337a726b">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the meetings and require 
the services of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional 
Office at least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the 
meetings.
    Records generated from these meetings may be inspected and 
reproduced at the Eastern Regional Office, as they become available, 
both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of 
this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, 
http://www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Eastern Regional Office at the 
above e-mail or street address.
    The meetings will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

    Dated in Washington, DC, July 6, 2009.
Peter Minarik,
Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. E9-16259 Filed 7-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-40066

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

GABRIEL PLASCENCIA-ACOSTA, also known as Jose Maro Sanchez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:14-CR-519-1

Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Gabriel Plascencia-Acosta 

raises an argument that he concedes is foreclosed by United States v. MartinezLugo, 782 F.3d 198, 204-05 (5th Cir. 2015). In Martinez-Lugo, 782 F.3d at 204-

05, we held that an enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) for a prior 

conviction of a drug trafficking offense is warranted regardless whether the

conviction for the prior offense required proof of remuneration or commercial 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 16, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-40066 Document: 00513080317 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/16/2015
No. 15-40066

2

activity. Accordingly, Plascencia-Acosta’s unopposed motion for summary 

disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-40066 Document: 00513080317 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/16/2015
**Exhibit 23.1****Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos. 333-80281,333-85135, 333-88586, 333-98735, 333-101331, 333-110664, 333-122267 and 333-128761 of StratexNetworks, Inc., (the Company) on Form S-8 and Registration Statements Nos.333-73021 and 333-50820of Stratex Networks on Form S-3 of our reports dated June 14, 2006, related to the consolidatedfinancial statements and financial statement schedule of the Company and management’s report on theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting (which report expresses an adverseopinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting because ofa material weakness) appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Stratex Networks, Inc. for theyear ended March 31, 2006./s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
**Exhibit 31.2**

**Certificationof Principal Financial OfficerPursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

I, Cary J.Claiborne, certify that:

1.              I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Osiris Therapeutics, Inc.

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.              Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.              The registrant’s other certifying officer(s), and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)       Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating  to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

(b)       Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(c)       Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.              The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)       All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

(b)       Any fraud, whetheror not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: August 10,2007
|        |   | /s/ Cary J. Claiborne |
|--------|--------|-----------------------|
|   |   | Cary J. Claiborne     |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7723

ANDRE MAZYCK,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN KATHLEEN GREEN; JOE CUMMONS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, District Judge. 

(1:11-cv-00557-BEL)

Submitted: April 19, 2012 Decided: April 25, 2012

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Andre Mazyck, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, 

Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Andre Mazyck appeals the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. Mazyck v. Green, No. 1:11-cv-00557-BEL (D. Md. Dec. 9, 

2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED