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

<ARTICLE>           5
<MULTIPLIER>        1
       
<S>                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>       Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>   Dec-26-1998
<PERIOD-END>        Dec-26-1998
<CASH>                                      828445
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                48826
<ALLOWANCES>                                  4669
<INVENTORY>                                  33551
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            915491
<PP&E>                                      141307
<DEPRECIATION>                              118930
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             1105906
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        62205
<BONDS>                                          0
<COMMON>                                   1617617
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                     40
<OTHER-SE>                                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               1043701
<SALES>                                     138686
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            138686
<CGS>                                       296220
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               296220
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            281456
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             336590
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         336590
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                336590
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .18
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Pension  Partners  1991-C,  Ltd.'s  balance  sheet and  statement of  operations
contained in its Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended June 30, 1999 and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         1,697
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  13,480
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               15,177
<PP&E>                                         4,138,518
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,530,230)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 623,465
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,501
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     621,964
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   623,465
<SALES>                                        83,998
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               84,476
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  52,996<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,539)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,539)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,539)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes  lease  operating  expenses,  production  taxes  and  depreciation,
depletion and  amortization  expense.  Excludes general and  administrative  and
interest expense.
</FN>



</TABLE>
IV 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 345

Extending condolences to the family, friends, and loved ones of the late 

David Christopher Kelly, PhD. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 25, 2003

Mr. MCDERMOTT (for himself, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California, Mrs. 

TAUSCHER, and Mr. FROST) submitted the following resolution; which 

was referred to the Committee on International Relations 

RESOLUTION

Extending condolences to the family, friends, and loved ones 

of the late David Christopher Kelly, PhD.

Whereas Dr. David Kelly contributed his expertise in microbiology to the Government of the United Kingdom as a scientific advisor to the Proliferation and Arms Control Secretariat of the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defence; 

Whereas Dr. David Kelly’s courageous work for the United 

Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), which between 

1991 and 1998 was charged with dismantling Iraq’s 

banned chemical, biological, and ballistic programs, 

earned him the great respect of world arms control experts and made the world safer for us all; 

Whereas Dr. David Kelly had a leading role in the inspections of Russian biological warfare facilities until 1994 
2

•HRES 345 IH 

under the 1992 trilateral agreement between the United 

States of America, the United Kingdom, and Russia and 

aided in reducing the danger of biological weapons in 

Russia; 

Whereas Dr. David Kelly’s professional life was characterized 

by his integrity, honor, and dedication to finding the 

truth; and 

Whereas David Kelly will be deeply missed by his loving wife 

Janice, and his three daughters Sian, Rachel, and Ellen: 

Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives, on be2 half of the American people, extends its deepest condo3 lences to the family, friends, and loved ones of the late 

4 David Christopher Kelly.

Æ
Exhibit 10.8

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

 

This First Amendment to Employment Agreement (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into this 6th day of December, 2012 between RHINO GP LLC (“Employer”) and David G. Zatezalo (“Employee”).

 

RECITALS:

 

A.            Employer and Employee entered into an Employment Agreement dated March 31, 2010 (the “Employment Agreement”).

 

B.            The parties now desire to amend the Agreement to extend Employee’s term of employment and increase the “Base Salary” (as defined in the Employment Agreement).

 

Now, therefore, in consideration of the foregoing, Employer and Employee hereby agree as follows:

 

1.             Section 1 of the Employment Agreement shall be amended to provide that the “Employment Term” as defined in the Employment Agreement ends on December 31, 2013.

 

2.             Section 3 of the Employment Agreement shall be amended to increase Base Salary from $520,000 to $540,000 for the calendar year 2013.

 

3.             In consideration of this Amendment, Employer agrees to pay to Employee a $45,000 signing bonus, due upon execution hereof.

 

4.             Except as modified by this Amendment, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.

 

[Remainder of page intentionally left blank; signature pages follow.]

 











 

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

 

	
Employer:
    	
RHINO   GP LLC
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
/s/   Mark Zand
    
	
 
    	
By:   Mark Zand, Chairman
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Employee:
    	
/s/   David G. Zatezalo
    
	
 
    	
David   G. Zatezalo
# Ages 15-17 profile

# Ages 18-19 profile

# Ages 20-24 profile

# Ages 25-44 profile
#### In the Matter of Tajani B., a Child Alleged to be Neglected. Suffolk County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Fred S., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter *875of Taliq B., a Child Alleged to be Neglected. Suffolk County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Fred S., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 2.) In the Matter of Telis S., a Child Alleged to be Neglected. Suffolk County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Fred S., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 3.)

[854 NYS2d 520]

In a child protective proceeding, the party seeking to establish neglect must show, “first, that a child’s physical, mental or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired and second, that the actual or threatened harm to the child is a consequence of the failure of the parent or caretaker to exercise a minimum degree of care in providing the child with proper supervision or guardianship” *(Nicholson v Scoppetta,*3 NY3d 357, 368 [2004]; *see Matter of Dimitriy R.,*39 AD3d 866 [2007]; Family Ct Act § 1012 [f]). A finding of neglect must be based on “competent, material and relevant evidence” (Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [iii]). Accordingly, hearsay is inadmissible in a fact-finding hearing, unless permitted by a specific statutory provision or unless a recognized exception applies *(see Matter of Imani B.,*27 AD3d 645, 646 [2006]).

The petitioner proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the subject children were neglected by the father *(see*Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [i]). Here, the nonhearsay evidence presented at the hearing was sufficient to prove that the father allowed a loaded gun to be placed on a bed accessible to the mother’s then three-year-old son and next to his then five-month-old daughter who was in a crib, thereby creating an imminent danger that their physical, mental, and emotional health would be harmed *(see Matter of Aminat O.,*20 AD3d 480, 481 [2005]; Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i]). Additionally, the threatened harm of the loaded gun was a consequence of the father failing *876to exercise a minimum degree of care in providing the children with proper supervision.

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Skelos, J.P., Lifson, Santucci and Balkin, JJ., concur.
J-S41033-14

2014 PA Super 182 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF 

: PENNSYLVANIA 

 Appellee : 

: 

 v. : 

: 

BYSHERE LAWRENCE, : 

: 

 Appellant : No. 2684 EDA 2013 

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence May 24, 2013, 

Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, 

Criminal Division at No. CP-51-CR-0010239-2011 

BEFORE: BOWES, DONOHUE and MUNDY, JJ. 

CONCURRING OPINION BY DONOHUE, J.: FILED AUGUST 27, 2014 

 I agree with the learned Majority that section 1102.1(a)(1) of the 

Pennsylvania Crimes Code neither violates the Eighth Amendment’s 

prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment nor offends the United 

States Supreme Court’s holding in Miller v. Alabama, __ U.S. __, 132 S.Ct. 

2455 (2012). I also agree that the remaining two issues raised by Appellant 

– that section 1102.1 is unconstitutional as it violates the Equal Protection 

and Ex Post Facto Clauses of the United States Constitution – are not 

reviewable based upon Appellant’s failure to raise these claims before the 

trial court. I reach this conclusion, however, solely based upon this Court’s 

2001 decision in Commonwealth v. Williams, 787 A.2d 1085 (Pa. Super. 

2001). 
J-S41033-14

- 2 - 

Like Appellant, the appellant in Williams challenged the applicability 

of a mandatory minimum sentence1

 for the first time on appeal. Williams, 

787 A.2d at 1087. Williams asserted that his sentence was illegal because 

the statute pursuant to which he was sentenced was unconstitutional. Id. 

This Court found that Williams’ claim did not implicate the legality of his 

sentence; rather, “a claim that a court relied on an unconstitutional statute 

when it sentenced a defendant is a challenge to the discretionary aspects of 

sentencing.” Id.; see also Commonwealth v. Robinson, 931 A.2d 15, 21 

(Pa. Super. 2007) (en banc) (stating that most sentencing claims involving a 

legal question “or an issue of constitutional dimension” implicate the 

discretionary aspects of the sentence). 

It is well-settled law that issues not raised below, even those of a 

constitutional dimension, are waived. See Commonwealth v. Miller, 80 

A.3d 806, 811 (Pa. Super. 2013) (finding the appellant’s argument that 

Megan’s Law IV violates the Ex Post Facto Clauses of the United States and 

Pennsylvania Constitutions waived based upon his failure to raise them 

before the trial court); Pa.R.A.P. 302(a) (“Issues not raised in the lower 

court are waived and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.”). 

Because Appellant raises his final two issues for the first time on appeal, I 

 

1

 In Williams, the appellant was given a mandatory minimum sentence

pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9712(a) and (b), relating to sentences for 

offenses committed with firearms. Williams, 787 A.2d at 1087.
J-S41033-14

- 3 - 

agree with the learned Majority that they are waived and not subject to 

review.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 154 (Friday, August 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 37617]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16907]



[[Page 37617]]

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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Notice of Permits Issued Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 
1978

AGENCY: National Science Foundation.

ACTION: Notice of permit issued.

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

SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish 
notice of permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, 
Public Law 95-541. This is the required notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nature McGinn, ACA Permit Officer, 
Office of Polar Programs, Rm. 755, National Science Foundation, 4201 
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Or by email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#531210122336213e3a2720133d20357d343c25"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="da9b999baabfa8b7b3aea99ab4a9bcf4bdb5ac">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 25, 2017, the National Science 
Foundation published a notice in the Federal Register of a permit 
application received. The permit was issued on August 2, 2017 to: Dr. 
William R. Fraser, Permit No. 2018-002.

Nadene G. Kennedy,
Polar Coordination Specialist, Office of Polar Programs.
[FR Doc. 2017-16907 Filed 8-10-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7555-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
EXHIBIT 99.1



                                CERTIFICATION OF
                             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           OF VALENCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.


     This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q
(the "Form 10-Q") for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 of Valence
Technology, Inc. (the "Issuer").

     I, Stephan B. Godevais, the Chief Executive Officer of the Issuer, certify
that to the best of my knowledge:

     (i)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a)
          or 78o(d)); and

     (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Issuer.

Dated:   November 13, 2002.


                                                  /S/ STEPHAN B. GODEVAIS
                                                  -----------------------------
                                                  Name:  Stephan B. Godevais



<PAGE>



                                CERTIFICATION OF
                           PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           OF VALENCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.


     This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q
(the "Form 10-Q") for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 of Valence
Technology, Inc. (the "Issuer").

     I, Kevin W. Mischnick, the Vice President of Finance (the Principal
Financial Officer) of the Issuer, certify that to the best of my knowledge:

     (i)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a)
          or 78o(d)); and

     (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Issuer.

Dated:  November 13, 2002.


                                                  /S/ KEVIN W. MISCHNICK
                                                  -----------------------------
                                                  Name:  Kevin W. Mischnick
EXHIBIT 31.1

                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Dr. Irwin A. Horowitz, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-QSB of DiversiFax, 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 officer(s) 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; 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. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) 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 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.

Date: July 17, 2006

By:   /s/ Dr. Irwin A. Horowitz
      -------------------------
      Dr. Irwin A. Horowitz, Chief Executive
      Officer and Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 21**Subsidiaries of the Registrant for the year ended December 31, 2006:   Subsidiary Name State of IncorporationKentucky Criterion Coal Company DelawarePine Branch Mining Inc. DelawareWEI — Ft. Lupton, Inc. DelawareWEI — Rensselaer, Inc. DelawareWEI — Roanoke Valley, Inc. DelawareWestmoreland Coal Sales Inc. DelawareWestmoreland Energy LLC DelawareWestmoreland Resources, Inc. DelawareWestmoreland Terminal Company DelawareWestmoreland — Altavista, Inc. DelawareWestmoreland — Ft. Drum, Inc. DelawareWestmoreland — Franklin, Inc. DelawareWestmoreland — Hopewell, Inc. DelawareWestmoreland Technical Services, Inc. DelawareCleancoal Terminal Co. DelawareCriterion Coal Co. DelawareDeane Processing Co. DelawareEastern Coal and Coke Co. PennsylvaniaWestmoreland Savage Corp. DelawareWestmoreland Mining LLC DelawareDakota Westmoreland Corporation DelawareWestern Energy Company MontanaTexas Westmoreland Coal Co. MontanaWestmoreland Risk Management, Ltd. BermudaBasin Resources, Inc. ColoradoNorth Central Energy Company ColoradoNew Horizon Coal Company, Inc. ColoradoWestmoreland Power, Inc. DelawareWestmoreland — Roanoke Valley, L.P. DelawareWestmoreland — North Carolina Power, L.L.C. VirginiaWestmoreland Utility Operations, LLC VirginiaWestmoreland Power Operations, LLC Virginia
Exhibit 10.15

 

AMENDMENT TO THE

 

MICHAELS STORES, INC. OFFICER SEVERANCE PAY PLAN

 

Established April 17, 2008

 

Amended as of July 28, 2008

 

Based upon guidance issued by the Internal Revenue Service with respect to Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and the rulings and regulations promulgated thereunder (“Section 409A”), the Michael Stores Inc. Officer Severance Pay Plan (the “Plan”) is amended as of the date hereof.

 

1.  Section VII.A(5) of the Plan (captioned:  “Please Note”) is hereby redesignated as Section VII.A.(6), and a new Section VII.A (5) is hereby added to the Plan to read as follows:

 

“Subject to the terms and conditions of this Plan, including, without limitation, Section VI.C and this Section VII.A, any payments, including any provision or continued benefits, made under this Plan (whether such payments or benefits are paid or provided, in whole or in part, pursuant to this Plan or in conjunction with any other agreement, arrangement or policy) which the Company determines constitute nonqualified deferred compensation subject to Section 409A and that would otherwise be paid during the sixty (60)-day period following a Participant’s Qualifying Termination shall instead be accumulated and paid, if at all, subject to the Participant’s having previously and timely signed, returned, and not revoked the Agreement and Release, on the next regular payday after the sixtieth (60th) day following the Participant’s Qualifying Termination.  For the avoidance of doubt, the required delay described in the immediately preceding sentence shall not apply to any amounts that are exempt from Section 409A (for example, but without limitation, by reason of the separation-pay-plan exemption at Section 1.409A-1(b)(9)(iii) of the Treasury Regulations under Section 409A).”

 

Except as hereby amended, all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this instrument this 27th day of December, 2012.

 

MICHAELS STORES, INC.

OFFICER SEVERANCE PAY PLAN

 

	
/s/Shawn   E. Hearn
    	
 
    
	
Senior   Vice President — Human Resources
# 17-2104

United States of America v. Gonzalez (Simmons)

1-10-19

88.059555