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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THRIFT MANAGEMENT, INC. FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE
28, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-27-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-1998
<CASH>                                       1,872,790
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  384,744
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    343,976
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,601,510
<PP&E>                                       1,017,374
<DEPRECIATION>                                (201,773)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,417,111
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          390,290
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,500
<COMMON>                                        21,750
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,002,571
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,417,111
<SALES>                                      4,401,205
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,401,205
<CGS>                                        2,620,297
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,620,297
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,883,843
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 308
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (44,614)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (16,788)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (27,826)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.01)
        

</TABLE>
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITOR PRIVATE  

              	FOR ATLAS-ENERGY FOR THE NINETIES-PUBLIC #3 LTD.


The firm, as Independent Certified Public Accountants, 
hereby consents to the use of the audit report dated 
February 11, 1997 on the balance sheet of Atlas-Energy for 
the Nineties-Public #3 Ltd., a Pennsylvania Limited 
Partnership as of December 31, 1996, and the related 
statements of income, changes in partners' capital accounts 
and cash flows for the year then ended, in the U.S. 
Securities and Exchange Commission Form 10-KSB and any 
amendments thereto for Atlas-Energy for the Nineties-Public 
#3 Ltd.


                                   McLaughlin & Courson
                           Certified Public Accountants



                               /s/ McLaughlin & Courson 


March 25, 1997
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
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

SEAN BAPTISTE NEAL,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

ROSEANNE CAMPBELL, Warden; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 10-17225

D.C. No. 2:08-cv-00313-GEBKJM

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Garland E. Burrell, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 21, 2011** 

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

California state prisoner Sean Baptiste Neal appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging First Amendment free

exercise and retaliation claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment, Toguchi v. Chung,

FILED

NOV 23 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-17225

391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004), and dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A,

Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Neal’s free

exercise claim on the basis of qualified immunity grounds because Neal failed to

raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants substantially

burdened his ability to practice his religion. See Rodriguez v. Maricopa Cnty.

Cmty. Coll. Dist., 605 F.3d 703, 711 (9th Cir. 2010) (a defendant is entitled to

qualified immunity if there is no constitutional violation); Shakur v. Schriro, 514

F.3d 878, 884-85 (9th Cir. 2008) (Free Exercise Clause is only implicated when a

prison practice burdens an inmate’s sincerely-held religious beliefs); see also Allen

v. Toombs, 827 F.2d 563, 568-69 (9th Cir. 1987) (prison administrators need not

provide each inmate with the spiritual counselor of his or her choice).

The district court properly dismissed Neal’s retaliation claim because Neal’s

conclusory allegations failed to state a claim for retaliation. See Rhodes v.

Robinson, 408 F.3d 559, 567-68 (9th Cir. 2005) (setting forth five elements of a

First Amendment retaliation claim).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Neal’s motions to

appoint an expert witness because Neal’s action did not involve complex issues or

evidence. See Walker v. Am. Home Shield Long Term Disability Plan, 180 F.3d
3 10-17225

1065, 1071 (9th Cir. 1999) (appointment of expert is reviewed for abuse of

discretion).

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.1

                  CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                             CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of netGuru, Inc.
(the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 (the "Report"), the
undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, 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, 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.

Dated: August 14, 2002                          By:  /s/ Amrit K. Das
                                                         -----------------
                                                         Amrit K. Das
                                                         Chief Executive Officer

         In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of netGuru, Inc.
(the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 (the "Report"), the
undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, 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, 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.

Dated: August 14, 2002                          By: /s/ Bruce K. Nelson
                                                        ---------------
                                                        Bruce Nelson
                                                        Chief Financial Officer
a51006665ex4_1.htm


Exhibit 4.1








AMENDMENT NO. 3


 


TO


 


RIGHTS AGREEMENT


 







This Amendment No. 3 to Rights Agreement (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into as of December 18, 2014, by and between Contango ORE, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) and Computershare Trust Company, N.A., as Rights Agent (the “Rights Agent”).







WHEREAS, the Company and the Rights Agent have entered into that certain Rights Agreement, dated as of December 20, 2012, as amended by that certain Amendment No. 1 to Rights Agreement, dated as of March 21, 2013, and as further amended by that certain Amendment No. 2 to Rights Agreement, dated as of September 29, 2014 (as amended, the “Rights Agreement”)







WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 27 of the Rights Agreement, the Company may supplement or amend any provision of the Rights Agreement in any respect in accordance with the provisions of such section; and







WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Rights Agreement and in accordance with Section 27 thereof, the Company has directed that the Rights Agreement be amended as set forth in this Amendment.


 


NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual agreements set forth herein, the parties hereby agree to amend the Rights Agreement as follows:


 


1. Amendments.  The Rights Agreement is hereby amended as follows:


 


(a) Section 1 of the Rights Agreement by replacing “Tanana Gold, LLC” wherever it appears with “Peak Gold, LLC”:


 


(b) Section 7(a) of the Rights Agreement by replacing the reference to “December 19, 2014” in clause (i) of Section 7(a) with “December 19, 2016.”


 


2. No Further Amendments.  Except as expressly provided herein, the terms and conditions of the Rights Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.


 


3. Counterparts.  This Amendment may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.  A signature to this Amendment transmitted electronically shall have the same authority, effect, and enforceability as an original signature.


 




  





  











  






 


4. Governing Law.  This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, without giving effect to the conflicts of law provisions thereof.


 







[Signature page follows.]









  





  











  






 


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


 



	  	
CONTANGO ORE, INC.

	 
	  	  	 
	  	  	 
	  	
By:

	
/s/ John B. Juneau

	 
	  	  	
Name: John B. Juneau

	 
	  	  	
Title:   President and Chief Executive Officer

	 



 




  





  











  






 







	  	
COMPUTERSHARE TRUST COMPANY, N.A.

	 
	  	  	 
	  	
By:

	
/s/ Dennis V. Moccia

	 
	  	  	
Name: Dennis V. Moccia

	 
	  	  	
Title: Manager, Contract Administration
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3085 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3085

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the treatment 
   of Indian tribal governments as State governments for purposes of 
    determining the sources of support of charitable organizations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 26, 2009

  Mr. Becerra (for himself, Mr. Nunes, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Honda, Mr. 
    Kildee, Mr. Lujan, Ms. McCollum, and Mr. Olver) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the treatment 
   of Indian tribal governments as State governments for purposes of 
    determining the sources of support of charitable organizations.

    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 ``Tribal Charities Fairness Act of 
2009''.

SEC. 2. PUBLIC SUPPORT BY INDIAN TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS.

    (a) In General.--Section 7871(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 (relating to Indian tribal governments treated as States for 
certain purposes) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of 
paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (7) and 
inserting ``; and'', and by adding at the end the following new 
paragraph:
            ``(8) for purposes of--
                    ``(A) determining support of an organization 
                described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi), and
                    ``(B) determining whether an organization is 
                described in paragraph (1) or (2) of section 509(a) for 
                purposes of section 509(a)(3).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to--
            (1) support received before, on, or after the date of the 
        enactment of this Act, and
            (2) the determination of the status of any organization 
        with respect to any taxable year beginning after such date of 
        enactment.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as Receiver for 10368—First Heritage Bank, Snohomish, Washington (Receiver) has been authorized to take all actions necessary to terminate the Receivership Estate of First Heritage Bank (Receivership Estate); the Receiver has made all dividend distributions required by law.

                    The Receiver has further irrevocably authorized and appointed FDIC-Corporate as its attorney-in-fact to execute and file any and all documents that may be required to be executed by the Receiver which FDIC-Corporate, in its sole discretion, deems necessary; including but not limited to releases,                           ( print page 46991)                        discharges, satisfactions, endorsements, assignments and deeds. Effective October 1, 2017, the Receivership Estate has been terminated, the Receiver discharged, and the Receivership Estate has ceased to exist as a legal entity.                

Dated: October 4, 2017.

Robert E. Feldman,

Executive Secretary, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

[FR Doc. 2017-21707 Filed 10-6-17; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
II 

Calendar No. 235 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2877 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 14, 2009 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

DECEMBER 17, 2009 

Reported by Mr. LIEBERMAN, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 76 Brookside Avenue in Chester, New York, 

as the ‘‘1st Lieutenant Louis Allen Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. 1ST LIEUTENANT LOUIS ALLEN POST OFFICE. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 76 Brookside Avenue in Chester, 

6 New York, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘1st 

7 Lieutenant Louis Allen Post Office’’. 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2877 RS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘1st Lieutenant Louis 

5 Allen Post Office’’. 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS

dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 235 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2877 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostAllen Post Office’’. Chester, New York, as the ‘‘1st Lieutenant Louis al Service located at 76 Brookside Avenue in 

DECEMBER 17, 2009 

Reported without amendment 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Blu Vaz, Appellant.

[988 NYS2d 179]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J), rendered February 15, 2011, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of two years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s belated mistrial motion, made after a detective revealed defendant’s involvement in an uncharged crime. The court gave curative instructions that were sufficient to prevent any prejudice *(see People v Santiago,*52 NY2d 865 [1981]), and which the jury is presumed to have followed *(see People v Davis,*58 NY2d 1102, 1104 [1983]). Although the prosecutor should have sought an advance ruling before introducing this testimony, the drastic remedy of a mistrial was not warranted, particularly since defense counsel allowed the prosecutor to continue questioning the detective about defendant’s prior arrest and raised no objection until after the completion of the detective’s direct examination *(see People v Maschi,*49 NY2d 784 [1980]).

The evidence at a *Hinton*hearing established an overriding interest that warranted a limited closure of the courtroom *(see Waller v Georgia,*467 US 39 [1984]). The undercover officer’s testimony, including testimony that he expected to continue *588working undercover in the vicinity of defendant’s arrest, established a substantial probability that his undercover status and safety would be jeopardized by testifying in an open courtroom *(see People v Echevarria,*21 NY3d 1, 12-14 [2013]). Defendant did not preserve his specific claims regarding the manner in which the court made its ruling, including his claim that the court employed irrelevant or inappropriate criteria *(see e.g. People v Doster,*13 AD3d 114, 115 [2004], *lv denied*4 NY3d 763 [2005]), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that these claims do not warrant reversal.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s resolution of a conflict between field and laboratory tests for controlled substances.

Concur— Tom, J.E, Moskowitz, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels and Clark, JJ.
EXHIBIT 99.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Toby Chu, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of SEGlobal Equities Corp.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis quarterly report; 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterlyreport; 

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

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosurecontrols and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date ofthis quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions aboutthe effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on ourevaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors andthe audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

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

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

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I haveindicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changesin internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affectinternal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses.

Date: May 15, 2003

         /s/ Toby Chu**By**:_____________________________**Toby Chu , President and CEO/Director**
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Altair Nanotechnologies Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Alan J. Gotcher, 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 the best of my knowledge:





(1)  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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








/s/
                Alan J. GotcherAlan
                J. Gotcher, Chief Executive OfficerMay
                10, 2006