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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELATED NOTES THERETO AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELATED
NOTES.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                         119,479
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,525,799
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    320,619
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,588,998
<PP&E>                                         625,060
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,616,387
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,576,298
<BONDS>                                        476,432
<COMMON>                                       290,733
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,616,387
<SALES>                                        168,528
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,292,840
<CGS>                                          518,926
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,024,309
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              44,299
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (775,768)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (775,768)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (775,768)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.06)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2011173EN.01001501.xml

| 11.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 173/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 173/15

---

Order of the General Court of 8 April 2011 — Bakkers v Council and Commission

(Case T-146/97) (1)

1

2011/C 173/31

Language of the case: Dutch

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 199, 28.6.1997.

1

---
#### In the Matter of Mary E. Hunn against John J. Naples, et al.

Stay granted pending determination of appeal on consent of parties.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-10638 Summary Calendar

LARRY BEASLEY,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

JANIE COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:01-CV-333-H

March 8, 2002

Before POLITZ, STEWART, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Larry Beasley, Texas prisoner # 419554, appeals the denial of his 28 U.S.C. §1 Beasley v. Cockrell , No. 01-10638 (5th Cir. Sept. 26, 2001) (unpublished).

2 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(3).

3 H orsley v. Johnson

, 197 F. 3d 134, 137 (5th Cir. 1999) (dism issal of

unexhausted claim without prej udice was abuse of discretion where the state court would have considered the claim procedurally defaulted).

2 2254 petition. We previously granted his motion for a COA on the issue “[w]hether

Beasley has identified a property interest in the resto ration of good-time credits

forfeit ed upon the revocation of his parole such that he was entitled to due process

before restoration of the good-time credits was denied.” 1

The Respondent argues for the first time on appeal that Beasley has failed to

exhaust his administrative and state-court remedies. The Respondent was not served

with Beasley’s petition in the district court; therefore, it has not waived the right to rely

on the exhaustion defense. 2 We therefore vacate the judgment of the district court and

remand this matter for a determ ination whether Beasley has exhausted his

administrative and state-court remedies. If the district court determines that Beasley’s

claim is not exhausted, it should further determine whether the pet ition should be

dismissed without prejudice to allow him to pursue his claim in Texas state court. 3

VACATED an d REMANDED; Motion to Supplem ent Record on Appeal

GRANTED.
§ 2400.7 Original classification authority. ( a ) Authority for original classification of information as Top Secret shall be exercised within OSTP only by the Director and by such principal subordinate officials having frequent need to exercise such authority as the Director shall designate in writing.
( b ) The authority to classify information originally as Secret shall be exercised within OSTP only by the Director, other officials delegated in writing to have original Top Secret classification authority, and any other officials delegated in writing to have original Secret classification authority.
( c ) The authority to classify information originally as Confidential shall be exercised within OSTP only by officials with original Top Secret or Secret classification authority and any officials delegated in writing to have original Confidential classification authority.
#### § 21.415 Must the statutory authority specifically mention the use of grants or other assistance instruments?

No, the statutory authority described in § 21.410 need not specifically say that the purpose of the program is assistance or mention the use of any type of assistance instrument. However, the intent of the statute must support a judgment that the use of an assistance instrument is appropriate. For example, a DoD Component may judge that the principal purpose of a program for which it has authorizing legislation is assistance, rather than acquisition. The DoD Component would properly use an assistance instrument to carry out that program, in accordance with 31 U.S.C. chapter 63.
### **CHAPTER 1035—NATIONAL PARK CENTENNIAL CHALLENGE FUND**

Sec. 1

103501.
Establishment.
103502.
Signature projects and programs.
103503.
Summary to Congress.

1  Editorially supplied.
### §8121. Claim

Compensation under this subchapter may be allowed only if an individual or someone on his behalf makes claim therefor. The claim shall—

(1) be made in writing within the time specified by section 8122 of this title;

(2) be delivered to the office of the Secretary of Labor or to an individual whom the Secretary may designate by regulation, or deposited in the mail properly stamped and addressed to the Secretary or his designee;

(3) be on a form approved by the Secretary;

(4) contain all information required by the Secretary;

(5) be sworn to by the individual entitled to compensation or someone on his behalf; and

(6) except in case of death, be accompanied by a certificate of the physician of the employee stating the nature of the injury and the nature and probable extent of the disability.

The Secretary may waive paragraphs (3)–(6) of this section for reasonable cause shown.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 543; Pub. L. 93–416, §13, Sept. 7, 1974, 88 Stat. 1147.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5 U.S.C. 768. | Sept. 7, 1916, ch. 458, §18, 39 Stat. 746. |
| | 5 U.S.C. 769. | Sept. 7, 1916, ch. 458, §19, 39 Stat. 746. |

Statutes at Large

The words "except as provided in section 788" in former section 768 are omitted as unnecessary as former section 788 dealt with recovery of overpayments after claims were made.

Administration of this subchapter was transferred to the Secretary of Labor by section 1 of 1950 Reorg. Plan No. 19, 64 Stat. 1271 (see section 8145).

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1974—Par. (3). Pub. L. 93–416 substituted "approved" for "furnished".

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

#### Effective Date of 1974 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 93–416 effective Sept. 7, 1974, and applicable to any injury or death occurring on or after Sept. 7, 1974, see section 23(a) of Pub. L. 93–416, set out as a note under section 8101 of this title.

#### Increase in Time-Period for FECA Claimant Supply Supporting Documentation to Office of Worker's Compensation

Pub. L. 117–263, div. E, title LIII, §5305(c), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3255, provided that: "Not later than 16 days after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 2022], the Secretary of Labor shall—

"(1) amend section 10.121 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, or any successor regulation, by striking '30 days' and inserting '60 days'; and

"(2) modify the Federal Employees' Compensation Act manual to reflect the changes made by the Secretary pursuant to paragraph (1)."
### Need to return call by / at/between and

. Signature:

___________________________ Project No.: 0172.09.029.0 4 1 DISTRIBUTION

Page _ 1 _ of

__ 1

_

Project Name: Steam Electric Rulemaking

TELEPHONE CALL RECORD

Outgoing Call Date: 10/13/2011 Time: 10:30 AM

Company Name: Northern States Power Co ( She rburne County

Power Plant) Contact Name: Mary Dieltz

Phone No.: 763

- 261

- 3124

Name: TJ Finseth , Eastern Research Group

GENERAL SUBJECT : Sherburne County ’s FGMC System



## TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN

I called M s

. Dieltz with Northern States Power Co on October 13, 2011 to discuss the flue gas mercury control

(FGMC) system at Sherburne County for Unit 3 . Ms. Dieltz confirmed that for Unit 3, the plant operates an

activated carbon injection system upstream of a dry FGD system and that th e FGD solids, fly ash, and mercury

impregnated carbon are collected in a baghouse and stored in a landfill. Ms. Dieltz confirmed that there is no

wastewater from this operation.

Ms. Dieltz stated that for Units 1 and 2, they are planning to install an act ivated carbon inje ction system by

December 2014. The units currently have a venturi water scrubber as t he particulate control system. The

scrubber does achie ve some removal of sulfur dioxide from the calcium in the ash, but the plant does not use

lime or l imestone within the scrubber. Therefore, the wastewater from the scrubber is simil ar to a fly ash sluice

stream. The activated carbon injection system will be installed upstream of the water scrubber and therefore, the

mercury

- impregnated carbon will be ca ptured and transferred with the fly ash sluice to a thickener for

treatment. The solids from the thickener are sent to the slurry pond and the overflow from the pond is used as

ma ke up for the scrubber system. The overflow from the thickener is transferred to their pond system and

eventually reused as make up to the scrubber system.

Ms. Dieltz stated that the plant is not a zero discharge plant because it is permitted to discharge cooling tower

blowdown, but it is zero discharge for all other wastewaters.
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

MAR 24, 2010

JOHN LEY

 CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 09-15648

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 05-00405-CR-T-17-EAJ

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ORACIN WATSON FILSAIME,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

_________________________

(March 24, 2010)

Before CARNES, HULL and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
Leonard E. Clark, appointed counsel for Oracin W. Filsaime, has moved to

withdraw from further representation of the appellant, because, in his opinion, the

appeal is without merit. Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of

the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the

appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no

arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the

district court’s denial of Filsaime’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion is AFFIRMED.

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          10,759
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                15,569
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     30,360
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        113,543
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,473
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 175,666
<DEPOSITS>                                     152,802
<SHORT-TERM>                                     3,049
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                633
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           109
<OTHER-SE>                                      19,073
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 175,666
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  8,752
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,746
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   865
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                11,363
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               4,520
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,570
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            6,793
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      254
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  5,511
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,802
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,131
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,131
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.10
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.02
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,763
<LOANS-PAST>                                       160
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    44
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,508
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      418
<RECOVERIES>                                       129
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,473
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.1








The
following certification accompanies Dynamics Research Corporation’s Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008 and is not
filed as provided in Item 601(b)(32)(ii) of Regulation S-K of the Securities and
Exchange Commission.





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 on Form 10-Q of Dynamics Research
Corporation, a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”), for the quarter ended
March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to his knowledge:





(1) the
Report of the Company filed today pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act; and





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





Date:  May
      08, 2009
            /s/
      James P. ReganChairman,
      President and Chief Executive
Officer
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1205 

Finding that Merrick Garland, Attorney General of the United States, is 

in contempt of the House of Representatives for disobeying a certain 

subpoena. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2024 

Mrs. LUNA submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Finding that Merrick Garland, Attorney General of the 

United States, is in contempt of the House of Representatives for disobeying a certain subpoena. 

Whereas, on February 27, 2024, Merrick Garland, Attorney 

General of the United States, was duly served with a subpoena to produce a narrow and specific set of materials 

possessed by the Department of Justice and related to 

Special Counsel Robert K. Hur’s investigation of President Joe Biden’s ‘‘willful’’ mishandling of classified documents to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House 

of Representatives and the Committee on Oversight and 

Accountability of the House of Representatives in Washington, DC; 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1205 IH 

Whereas Attorney General Garland has, in disobedience of 

such subpoena, failed to produce the set of materials; and 

Whereas the set of materials possessed by the Department of 

Justice is material and necessary in order that the House 

of Representatives may properly execute the functions 

imposed on it and may obtain information necessary as 

a basis for such legislative and other action as the House 

of Representatives may deem necessary and proper: Now, 

therefore be it 

1 Resolved, That— 

2 (1) Merrick Garland, Attorney General of the 

3 United States, is found in contempt of the House of 

4 Representatives for disobeying the February 27, 

5 2024, subpoena; and 

6 (2) the Speaker of the House of Representa7 tives shall issue a warrant commanding the Sergeant 

8 at Arms or the deputy of the Sergeant at Arms to 

9 take into custody the body of Attorney General Gar10 land wherever found, and to bring Attorney General 

11 Garland before the bar of the House of Representa12 tives, then and there to answer such questions perti13 nent to the matter under inquiry as the House of 

14 Representatives may order the Speaker of the House 

15 of Representatives to propound, and to keep Attor16 ney General Garland in custody to await the further 

17 order of the House of Representatives. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

MEMORANDUM OPINION

N o. 04

- 14

- 00885

- CR

Victor Perez P RADO

, Appellant

v.

The State

The S TATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 216th Judicial District Court, Gillespie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 5355

Honorable N. Keith Williams, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 29, 2015

DIS MISSED

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appea l in compliance with Rule 42.2(a). See

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2(a). The motion is granted and this appeal is dismissed. See id.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lifecore Biomedical, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q
for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), I, Dennis J. Allingham, President and 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:  (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 result of operations of the Company. /s/ Dennis J. Allingham

Dennis J. AllinghamPresident, Chief Executive Officer, Secretary and Director(principal executive officer)May 9, 2005
#### § 219.121 [Reserved]
### **CHAPTER 3071—MISCELLANEOUS**

Sec.
307101.
World Heritage Convention.
307102.
Effective date of regulations.
307103.
Access to information.
307104.
Inapplicability of division to White House, Supreme Court building, or United States Capitol.
307105.
Attorney's fees and costs to prevailing parties in civil actions.
307106.
Authorization for expenditure of appropriated funds.
307107.
Donations and bequests of money, personal property, and less than fee interests in historic property.
307108.
Privately donated funds.
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 DYNASIL CORPORATION
OF AMERICA (the "Company") on Form 10QSB for the period ended
June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), We, Craig T
Dunham, President and Chief Executive Officer of The Company and
Laura Lunardo, 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 result of operations of The Company.



                                    /s/ Craig T Dunham
                                   -------------------
                                   Craig T Dunham
                                   President and Chief Executive
                                   Officer


                                   /s/ Laura Lunardo
                                   -------------------
                                   Laura Lunardo
                                   Chief Financial Officer

August 13, 2008