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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         655,650
<SECURITIES>                                 1,991,541
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,215,085
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (250,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  1,314,136
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,344,388
<PP&E>                                         404,640
<DEPRECIATION>                               (205,688)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,417,451
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,636,947
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        68,636
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,711,869
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,417,451
<SALES>                                      3,867,600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,867,600
<CGS>                                        1,357,462
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,772,869
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (160,070)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               205,287
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,805
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,262,731)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   162,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,940,662)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,940,662)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.54)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.54)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.02

                        [TRIPLE NET PROPERTIES LLC LOGO]

January 8, 2004

VIA FACSIMILE (202) 333-3323

Mr. Gary Griffin
CONSORTIUM TWO - PUBLIC LEDGER, L.P.
c/o The Bernstein Companies
3299 K Street N.W., Suite 700
Washington, DC 20007

VIA FACSIMILE (215) 568-2604

Mr. Robert J. Faney, Jr.
Cushman & Wakefield of Pennsylvania, Inc.
1717 Arch  Street
30th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103

RE:      PUBLIC LEDGER BUILDING
         PHILADELPHIA, PA

Dear Gentlemen:

Pursuant to Section 3.8 of the real estate Purchase and Sale Agreement by and
between CONSORTIUM TWO - PUBLIC LEDGER, L.P. ("Seller") and Triple Net
Properties, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company ("Purchaser") (the
"Agreement"). The Purchaser's inspection Period expires on January 8, 2004.

The Purchaser respectfully requests an extension of due diligence through 4:00
P.M. Eastern Standard Time on Monday January 12, 2004. Should the Seller agree
to the above terms, please sign below.

Buyer                                    Seller

/s/ Anthony W. Thompson                  /s/ Marc N. Duber
------------------------------           ---------------------------------------
Anthony W. Thompson,                     By: Marc N. Duber
President, Triple Net Properties, LLC        Vice President

cc: Louis Rogers, Joseph J. McQuade, Hirschler Fleischer (via facsimile (804)
644-0957)

                           1551 North Tustin Avenue, Suite 200 - Santa Ana, CA
92705 tel 714.667.8252 toll-free 887.888.REIT (7348) 714.836.5263 fax
714.667.0611
#### § 2640.205 Employee responsibility.

Prior to taking official action in a matter which an employee knows would affect his financial interest or the interest of another person specified in 18 U.S.C. 208(a), an employee must determine whether one of the exemptions in §§ 2640.201, 2640.202, or 2640.203 would permit his action notwithstanding the existence of the disqualifying interest. An employee who is unsure whether an exemption is applicable in a particular case, should consult an agency ethics official prior to taking action in a particular matter.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AND STATEMENTS OF LOSS AND ACCUMULATED DEFICIT AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10QSB FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JULY 31, 1996.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1996
<CASH>                                           74519
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 74519
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  155009
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             4294
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                      165312
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    155009
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  3782
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     4566
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (784)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (784)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (784)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)
        

</TABLE>
```

[107th Congress Public Law 34]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ034.107]

[[Page 115 STAT. 216]]

Public Law 107-34
107th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  113 South Main Street in Sylvania, Georgia, as the ``G. Elliot Hagan 
     Post Office Building''. <<NOTE: Aug. 20, 2001 -  [H.R. 1183]>> 

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 113 
South Main Street in Sylvania, Georgia, shall be known and designated as 
the ``G. Elliot Hagan Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``G. Elliot Hagan Post Office 
Building''.

    Approved August 20, 2001.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 1183:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 147 (2001):
            June 5, considered and passed House.
            Aug. 3, considered and passed Senate.
```
BLD
- 100 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________ No. 19

- 1114

___________ IN RE: ERIC J. JOHNSON ,

Petitioner

____________________________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United Sta te s District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Related to M.D. Pa. Crim. No. 1:12

- cr - 00150

- 001 )

____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

February 14, 2019
Before: AMBRO, KRAUSE and PORTER , Circuit Judge s

(Opinion filed February 22, 2019 )

_________ OPINION *

_________ PER CURIAM Pro se petitioner Eric Johnson has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus, requesting that we compel the District Court to rule on his pending motion for reconsideration of the District Court’ s order granting partial relief on his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). For the reasons set forth below, we will deny the petition.

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 d oes not2

In October 2015, Johnson filed a motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c )(2) based on Amendment 782 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines , and the Office of the Federal Public Defender was appointed to represent him

. In April 2016, the District Court grante d Johnson’s § 3582(c)(2) motion and reduced his sentence from 200 months’ imprisonment to 188 months’ imprisonment. On April 16, 2018, Johnson filed a motion for reconsideration of the District Court ’s order granting “partial relief” on his previously filed § 3582(c)(2) motion. When Johnson filed this mandamus petition, on
Jan uary 16, 2019, his motion for reconsideration had been pending for nine months. Subsequently, on January 28, 2019, the District Court referred Johnson’s mot ion for reconsideration to the O ffice of the Federal Public Defender for its consideration.
Mandam us is a drastic remedy available only in extraordinary circumstances. In re Diet Drugs Prods. Liab. Litig. , 418 F.3d 372, 378 (3d Cir. 2005). To demonstrate that mandamus is appropriate, a petitioner must demonstrate that “(1) no other adequate

means [ ex ist ] to attain the relief he desires, (2) the party’s right to issuance of the writ is clear and indisputable, and (3) the writ is appropriate under the circumstances.” Hollingsworth v. Perry , 558 U.S. 183, 190 (2010) (per curiam) (internal quotation mark s and citation omitted). Here, Johnson has not demonstrated that the writ is appropriate under the circumstances. Since he filed his mandamus petition, the District Court has addressed his
motion for reconsid eration and referred it to the O ffice of the F ederal Public Defender.
constitute binding precedent.3

In light of the District Court’s action , we are confident that the District Court will further
act on his motion for reconsideration in due course.
### §873. Extra compensation for instrument observers, recorders and other Federal employees for oceanographic, seismographic and magnetic observations

The Secretary of Commerce is authorized to pay extra compensation to members of crews of vessels when assigned duties as instrument observer or recorder, and to employees of other Federal agencies while observing tides or currents, or tending seismographs or magnetographs, at such rates as may be specified from time to time by him and without regard to section 5533 of title 5.

(July 22, 1947, ch. 286, §2, 61 Stat. 400; Pub. L. 86–397, §1, Mar. 28, 1960, 74 Stat. 11; Pub. L. 88–448, title IV, §401(l), Aug. 19, 1964, 78 Stat. 491.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

"Section 5533 of title 5" substituted in text for "section 301 of the Dual Compensation Act [5 U.S.C. 3105]" on authority of Pub. L. 89–554, §7(b), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 631, the first section of which enacted Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

#### Amendments

1964—Pub. L. 88–448 inserted "and without regard to section 301 of the Dual Compensation Act".

1960—Pub. L. 86–397 substituted "Secretary of Commerce" for "Coast and Geodetic Survey" and "instrument observer or recorder" for "bombers or fathometer readers," inserted reference to employees tending magnetographs, and authorized Secretary to establish rates of compensation.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1964 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 88–448 effective on first day of first month which begins later than the ninetieth day following Aug. 19, 1964, see section 403 of Pub. L. 88–448.
Abatement Order filed May 29, 2014 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-14-00287-CV

____________

RICHARD ALAN HAASE AND AUDREY LOIS HAASE, Appellants

V.

SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 268th District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 12-DCV-197259

ABATEMENT ORDER

According to information provided to this court, this appeal is from a 

judgment signed January 10, 2014. Appellants filed a notice of appeal on April 14, 

2014. On May 8, 2014, appellants filed a motion to proceed as indigent in this 

court. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1(h). On May 16, 2014, the district clerk and the 

court reporter filed a contest to appellants’ motion. 
If an affidavit of indigence is filed in an appellate court, and a contest is 

filed, the court may refer the matter to the trial court with instructions to hear 

evidence and grant the appropriate relief. Tex. R. App. P. 20.1(h)(4).

Accordingly, we refer the matter to the trial court and direct the trial court to 

hold a hearing and make written findings as to whether appellants are entitled to 

proceed without payment of costs. 

The court reporter shall file a reporter’s record from the hearing and any 

exhibits admitted at the hearing on the contest to appellants’ claim of indigence. 

The record of the hearing and the trial court’s written findings shall be filed with 

the clerk of this court on or before 30 days from the date of this order.

The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this court’s 

active docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this court’s active docket when the 

trial court’s ruling on indigence has been completed. The court will also consider 

an appropriate motion to reinstate the appeal filed by any party. It is the 

responsibility of any party seeking reinstatement to request a hearing date from the 

trial court and to schedule a hearing in compliance with this court’s order. If the 

parties do not request a hearing, the court coordinator of the trial court shall set a 

hearing date and notify the parties of such date.

PER CURIAM
### **CHAPTER 24—VESSEL BRIDGE-TO-BRIDGE COMMUNICATION**

Sec.
1201.
Statement of purpose.
1202.
Definitions.
1203.
Radiotelephone requirement.
1204.
Radiotelephone for exclusive use of master, person in charge, or pilot; frequency listening watch; portable radiotelephone equipment.
1205.
Radiotelephone capability; maintenance; restoration; consequences of loss: navigation of vessel.
1206.
Exemptions; terms and conditions.
1207.
Regulations.
1208.
Penalties.
Tier 3 2007 base case

This file contains national and state level emissions modeling sector total emissions by inventory pollutant and for air quality mo

All Sector State summary has the sum of all anthropogenic (including fires) emissions. Total NOX values include NO, NO2 and 

mrgrid (domain totals) show all of the emissions for the grid, including non-US

Overall totals are provided for both the continental US ("CONUS") and the eastern states.

Emissions are computed for each modeling sector and summarized.

Notes:

- In some sectors, ALD2 = ALD2_PRIMARY, and FORM = FORM_PRIMARY. However, since the two species have different m

 they do not appear equal in this spreadsheet. ALD2 (moles) = ALD2_PRIMARY (moles) if the mass ratio of the two is 1.0624. 

 - Some pre-SMOKE pollutants were combined to simplify the QA, including mercury.

 - FORM and ALD2 do not match up pre- and post-SMOKE because of integration, inexact molecular weight conversions, or bo

Modeling sector descriptions: 

ag - agricultural ammonia emissions

afdust/afdust_adj - area fugitive dust emissions; afdust_adj are the emissions after metorological and land use adj

biogenics - emissions from natural sources

c1c2rail - C1 and C2 commerical marine emissions plus railroad emissions

c3marine - C3 marine (ocean going vessel ) emissions

nonpt - nonpoint (county-level) not included in other sectors

nonroad - mobile source emissions from off-road equipment

onroad_RPD/RPV/RPP) - mobile source emissions on roads; onroad_RPD, onroad_RPV, and onroad_RPP are specif

onroad_ttl - total of onroad RPD, RPV, and RPP emissions

onroad_rfl - refueling emissions from onroad vehicles

othar - Non-US area sources

othon - Non-US onroad sources

onhpt - Non-US point sources

ptfire - Point source wild and prescribed fire emissions

ptegu_pk - Emissions from specific EGU peaking units

ptegu - Emissions from EGUs not specifically designated as peaking

ptnonipm - Point source emissions not included in ptegu_pk, ptegu, or pt_oilgas

pt_oilgas - oil and gas emissions from point sources

np_oilgas - oil and gas emissions from nonpoint sources

rwc - residential wood combustion emissions
entory pollutant and for air quality model species output from SMOKE

al NOX values include NO, NO2 and HONO. 

nce the two species have different molecular weights being used for the moles-to-mass conversion,

 the mass ratio of the two is 1.0624. For FORM and FORM_PRIMARY, the ratio is 0.9956.

 molecular weight conversions, or both.

er metorological and land use adjustments

_RPV, and onroad_RPP are specific subcategories based on the type of activity data used
EXHIBIT 32(a)



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 United Rentals, Inc. and United Rentals (North America), Inc. (the Companies) on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Wayland R. Hicks, Chief Executive Officer of the Companies, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| | 1. |  | the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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 Companies.
| | -- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/WAYLAND
R. HICKS

Wayland R. Hicks

Chief Executive Officer



March 15, 2004



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of
this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Companies and will be retained by the Companies and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# Rupprecht Law P. A.
324 Datura Street, Suite 200 | West Palm Beach, FL 33401 P: (561) 222

- 6979 | E: jon@jrupprechtlaw.com | W: www.jrupprechtlaw.com

July 10 , 2015 U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12

- 140, Washington, DC 20590
Re: Petition for Amendment to A dd A ircraft to Exemption # 11440 Issued to Wild Rabbit Productions, LLC

. (Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 0168)
Dear Sir or Madam: Wild Rabbit Productions, LLC was granted an exemption to conduct aerial d ata collection and closed set TV /movie filming using an Allied Drones Chaos X

- 8 , DJI S1000+ , and the DJI S1000 Premium

. Wild Rabbit Productions, LLC (Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 0168) requests for an amendment to th at exemption to add onto its fleet the DJI Inspire 1 . Wild Rabbit Productions, LLC agrees to operate under the same restrictions in the exemption. The aircraft ’ s manuals are listed here: Quick Start Guide http://download.dji

- innovations.com/downloads/inspire_1/en/Inspire_1_Quick_Start_Guide_en.zip User Manual http://download.dji

- innovations.com/downloads/inspire_1/en/Inspire_1_User_Manual_v1.2_en.zip Safety Guidelines http://download.dji

- innovations.com/downloads/inspire_1/en/Inspire_1_Safety_Guidelines_en.zip Maintenance Manual http://download.dji

- innovations.com/downloads/inspire_1/en/Inspire_1_Maintenance_ManualV1.0_en.zip Granting the additional aircraft wil l benefit the public because instead of dangerous helicopters being used, safer and quieter unmanned aircraft can b e used under the restric tions outlined in the exemption.
Since the Inspire 1 platform has been previously granted in other exemptions and would not set any precedent , there is good cause to waive the publishing of this petition in the Federal Register. Sincerely,

__________________________________________________ Jonathan B. Rupprecht, Esq.
### §2282g. Scope of feasibility studies

#### (a) Flood risk management or hurricane and storm damage risk reduction

In carrying out a feasibility study for a project for flood risk management or hurricane and storm damage risk reduction, the Secretary, at the request of the non-Federal interest for the study, shall formulate alternatives to maximize the net benefits from the reduction of the comprehensive flood risk within the geographic scope of the study from the isolated and compound effects of—

(1) a riverine discharge of any magnitude or frequency;

(2) inundation, wave attack, and erosion coinciding with a hurricane or coastal storm;

(3) flooding associated with tidally influenced portions of rivers, bays, and estuaries that are hydrologically connected to the coastal water body;

(4) a rainfall event of any magnitude or frequency;

(5) a tide of any magnitude or frequency;

(6) seasonal variation in water levels;

(7) groundwater emergence;

(8) sea level rise;

(9) subsidence; or

(10) any other driver of flood risk affecting the area within the geographic scope of the study.

#### (b) Water supply, water conservation, and drought risk reduction

In carrying out a feasibility study for any purpose, the Secretary, at the request of the non-Federal interest for the study, shall formulate alternatives—

(1) to maximize combined net benefits for the primary purpose of the study and for the purposes of water supply or water conservation (including the use of water supply conservation measures described in section 1116 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2016 (130 Stat. 1639)); or

(2) to include 1 or more measures for the purposes of water supply or water conservation if the Secretary determines that such measures may reduce potential adverse impacts of extreme weather events, including drought, on water resources within the geographic scope of the study.

#### (c) Cost sharing

All costs to carry out a feasibility study in accordance with this section shall be shared in accordance with the cost share requirements otherwise applicable to the study.

(Pub. L. 117–263, div. H, title LXXXI, §8106, Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3699.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 1116 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2016, referred to in subsec. (b)(1), is section 1116 of Pub. L. 114–322, title I, Dec. 16, 2016, 130 Stat. 1639, which is not classified to the Code.

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Water Resources Development Act of 2022, and also as part of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023, and not as part of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 which comprises this chapter.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### "Secretary" Defined

Secretary means the Secretary of the Army, see section 8002 of Pub. L. 117–263, set out as a note under section 2201 of this title.