alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
smi_Ex4_17


		
			Exhibit 4.17
		

		
			 
		

		
			Summary of sale and leaseback arrangements entered into by the Group with the subsidiaries of Sino IC Leasing Co., Ltd. 
		

		
			 
		

		
			In December 2016 and February 2017, there were two and three arrangements in consideration of US$249.2 million and US$250.6 million respectively, entered into by the Group with Sino IC Leasing (Tianjin) Co., Ltd. (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Sino IC Leasing) in the form of a sale and leaseback transaction with a repurchase option. A batch of production equipment of the Group was sold and leased back under the arrangements. As the repurchase prices are set at the expected fair value and the Group is not reasonably certain that it will exercise the repurchase options, the above transaction have been accounted for disposal of property, plant and equipment followed with an operating lease.
		

		
			 
		

		
			In July 2017, there were seven arrangements in total consideration of US$410.8 million entered into by the Group with Xincheng Leasing (Tianjin) Co., Ltd, Xindian Leasing (Tianjin) Co., Ltd and Xinlu Leasing (Tianjin) Co., Ltd. (the three leasing companies are wholly-owned subsidiaries of Sino IC Leasing) respectively, in the form of a sale and leaseback transaction with a repurchase option. A batch of production equipment of the Group was sold and leased back under these arrangements. As the repurchase prices are set at the expected fair value and the Group is not reasonably certain that it will exercise the repurchase options, the above transactions have been accounted for a disposal of property, plant and equipment followed with an operating lease.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 annual report of Dexterity Surgical, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Randall
K. Boatright, 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:

         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 results of operations of the
Company.

                                By:    /s/ Randall K. Boatright
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                Name:  Randall K. Boatright
                                Title: Executive Vice President, Chief Financial
                                       Officer
                                Date:  March 28, 2003


         This certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
                       
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  12-MOS  
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         6,171
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  27,572
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    1,449
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               35,555
<PP&E>                                         568,642
<DEPRECIATION>                                 198,734
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 433,937
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          73,268
<BONDS>                                        212,788
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       361
<OTHER-SE>                                     128,093
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   433,937
<SALES>                                        137,828
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               141,095
<CGS>                                          88,314
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  117,727
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               48,068
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             13,350
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (38,050)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (13,317)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (24,733)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.74)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.74)
        


</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

May 2, 2012 

d0425 

Order 

 

May 2, 2012 

143475 & (58) 

BRUCE WHITMAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, 

v SC: 143475 

 COA: 294703 

Genesee CC: 08-087993-CL 

CITY OF BURTON and CHARLES SMILEY, 

Defendants-Appellees/Cross-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 5, 2011 

judgment of the Court of Appeals and the application for leave to appeal as crossappellants are considered, and they are GRANTED. The parties shall include among the 

issues to be briefed whether Shallal v Catholic Social Services of Wayne County, 455 

Mich 604 (1997), correctly held that the primary motivation of an employee pursuing a 

whistleblower claim must be a desire to inform the public on matters of public concern, 

as opposed to personal vindictiveness. 

 Persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this 

case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


    CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Robert W. Boykin, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Boykin
Lodging Company (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:


         (1) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period
         ended March 31, 2003, which this certification accompanies, 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 results of operations of
         the Company.


/s/ Robert W. Boykin
--------------------------------------------------
Robert W. Boykin
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
May 14, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Boykin Lodging Company and will be retained by Boykin Lodging
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.


I, Shereen P. Jones, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial and Investment
Officer of Boykin Lodging Company (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:


         (1) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period
         ended March 31, 2003 which this certification accompanies, 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 results of operations of
         the Company.


/s/ Shereen P. Jones
----------------------------------------------------
Shereen P. Jones
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial and Investment Officer
May 14, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Boykin Lodging Company and will be retained by Boykin Lodging
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
OVIDIO FABRE

,

Petitioner,

v.

FLORIDA COMMISSION ON OFFENDER REVIEW

,
Respondent. ___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITIO N THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 14

- 0068

Opinion filed December 11, 2014.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari

-- Original Jurisdiction

.
Ovidio Fabre, pro se

, Petitioner.

Sarah J. Rumph, General Counsel, and Mark J. Hiers, Assistant General Counsel, Tal lahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits.

ROBERTS, RAY, and OSTERHAUS, JJ.

, CONCUR.
#### THE FLAMBOROUGH. SWITZERLAND MARINE INS. CO. v. THE FLAMBOROUGH.

(District Court, S. D. New York.

May 23, 1895.)

Injury to Freight—Inspection under Harter Act.

Cargo having been damaged through defects of the carrying steamer which could have been ascertained by proper inspection and examination, *held,*that the inspection 'that was made was not such as “due diligence” under the “Harter Act” requires; and *held,*that the shipowners were chargeable with any negligence of their agents appointed to inspect the steamer.

This action was brought by the Switzerland Marine insurance Company to recover losses sustained by its assured through jettison to and damage of cargo occasioned by a leak in the steamer Flamborough.

The Flamborough had taken cargo at New York for transportation to West Indian ports and when two days out encountered bad weather, and a few hours later began to leak. Thereupon some goods were jettisoned, but the leak continuing the steamer returned to New York. She was then docked for examination and it was found that 17 of her plates were worn out and that the leak had occurred through one of the plates wasting. The steamer was 27 years old and had been purchased from her former owners five months previous to the voyage. Her new owners were not familiar with shipping and at the time of purchase caused' the steamer to be examined by an inspector on their behalf. After purchasing, they placed her under the management of an experienced agent in New York and did not themselves take part in such management. The steamer was not docked at the time of purchase, nor at any time subsequent thereto before the voyage upon which the damage arose. The condition of the plates was such that an examination upon a dock, or a careful examination while the vessel was afloat would have disclosed their weakness.

Stillman & Hubbard and Mr. Mynderse, for libelant.

Wing, Putnam & Burlingham, for tbe Flamborough.

*471BROWN, District Judge.

The condition of the vessel, 27 years old, is proved by Mr. Congdon’s examination to have been so worn in her plates and unserviceable that Í find the inspection theretofore *made*could not bo such as “due diligence” under the “Harter Act” requires. 27 Stat. 4-id.

I also find the owners chargeable in this respect with any negligence of their agents appointed to inspect.

Decree for libelants, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENT FOR THE PERIOD
ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1996, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         708,817
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,823,570
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (285,385)
<INVENTORY>                                     46,385
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,004,365
<PP&E>                                      60,079,551
<DEPRECIATION>                              21,079,569
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              46,874,799
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,137,365
<BONDS>                                      5,212,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,004,370
<OTHER-SE>                                  14,622,075
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                46,874,799
<SALES>                                     23,331,018
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            24,704,786
<CGS>                                        7,797,136
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               19,437,920
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               153,960
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             659,264
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,295,267
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,313,969
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,981,298
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,981,298
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.97
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.97


</TABLE>
The State of TexasAppellee/s



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

January 29, 2015

N o. 04

- 14

- 00676

- CR

Gary Lynn BAKER

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 226th Judicia l District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CR4875

Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The Appellant ’ s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is hereby GRANTED. The

Appellant ’ s brief is due March 2, 2015.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 29th day of January, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOHN HOSKINGS,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

P.L. VAZQUEZ, Warden,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 08-17735

D.C. No. 1:05-cv-01430-OWW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Oliver W. Wanger, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 21, 2011** 

Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges. 

California state prisoner John Hoskings appeals from the district court’s

order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. 

FILED

NOV 28 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-17735

Hoskings contends that the Governor’s 2004 decision reversing the Board of

Prison Terms’s decision finding him suitable for parole is not supported by some

evidence. The record reflects that Hoskings received all process that was due. See

Swarthout v. Cooke, 131 S. Ct. 859, 862-63 (2011) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44822-44823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20486]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Center for Advancing Translational 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; Conference Grants Review.
    Date: November 8, 2017.
    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, DEM1, Room 1065, 6701 
Democracy Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Carol Lambert, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, 
Office of Scientific Review, National Center for Advancing 
Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health, 6701 
Democracy Blvd., Democracy 1, Room 1076, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-
435-0814, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#24484549464156506449454d480a4a4d4c0a434b52"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9df1fcf0fff8efe9ddf0fcf4f1b3f3f4f5b3faf2eb">[email protected]</span></a>.


[[Page 44823]]


(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.859, 
Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.350, 
B--Cooperative Agreements; 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research 
Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 20, 2017.
David Clary,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-20486 Filed 9-25-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3133 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3133

To amend titles 28 and 10, United States Code, to allow for certiorari 
 review of certain cases denied relief or review by the United States 
                 Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 6, 2011

   Mrs. Davis of California introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend titles 28 and 10, United States Code, to allow for certiorari 
 review of certain cases denied relief or review by the United States 
                 Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Equal Justice for Our Military Act 
of 2011''.

SEC. 2. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED 
              FORCES.

    (a) In General.--Section 1259 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``or denied'' after 
        ``granted''; and
            (2) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``or denied'' after 
        ``granted''.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Title 10.--Section 867a(a) of title 10, United States 
        Code, is amended by striking ``The Supreme Court may not review 
        by a writ of certiorari under this section any action of the 
        Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in refusing to grant a 
        petition for review.''.
            (2) Time for application for writ of certiorari.--Section 
        2101(g) of title 28, United States Code, is amended to read as 
        follows:
    ``(g) The time for application for a writ of certiorari to review a 
decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, or 
the decision of a Court of Criminal Appeals that the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces refuses to grant a petition to 
review, shall be as prescribed by rules of the Supreme Court.''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    (a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), the amendments made by 
this Act shall take effect upon the expiration of the 180-day period 
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply to 
any petition granted or denied by the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Armed Forces on or after that effective date.
    (b) Authority to Prescribe Rules.--The authority of the Supreme 
Court to prescribe rules to carry out section 2101(g) of title 28, 
United States Code, as amended by section 2(b)(2) of this Act, shall 
take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-10136

Summary Calendar

GERY LEE SCOTT,

Petitioner-Appellant

v.

LORIE DAVIS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL 

JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:16-CV-20

Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Gery Lee Scott, Texas prisoner # 1123905, seeks leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis (IFP) to appeal the district court’s transfer of his 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2254 application as successive and unauthorized. Scott was convicted of 

injury to a child-bodily injury and sentenced to 35 years of imprisonment. He 

raised claims challenging his conviction and sentence on the basis of an 

 

* 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

November 10, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-10136 Document: 00513755887 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/10/2016
No. 16-10136

2

allegedly unlawful sentence enhancement as well as the state and federal 

postconviction proceedings.

This appeal is frivolous and without merit because the district court 

correctly determined that the § 2254 application was successive and

unauthorized under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). See § 2254(a); Leal Garcia v. 

Quarterman, 573 F.3d 214, 222 (5th Cir. 2009); Moore v. Dretke, 369 F.3d 844, 

846 (5th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, Scott’s motions for IFP and appointment of 

counsel are DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See 5TH CIR.

R. 42.2; FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(5); Carson v. Polley, 689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 

1982).

This is Scott’s third unsuccessful attempt to challenge his conviction and 

sentence. He is WARNED that future frivolous or repetitive filings will result 

in the imposition of sanctions.

 Case: 16-10136 Document: 00513755887 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/10/2016