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 BRIDGFORD FOODS CORPORATION FOR THE THIRTY-NINE WEEKS
ENDED AUGUST 1, 1997, AS SET FORTH IN THIS FORM 10-Q FOR SUCH PERIOD, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-01-1997
<CASH>                                      12,201,717
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                9,788,858
<ALLOWANCES>                                   558,712
<INVENTORY>                                 15,236,357
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            44,947,638
<PP&E>                                      41,904,598
<DEPRECIATION>                              24,897,723
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              61,954,513
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       18,983,970
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     9,453,816
<OTHER-SE>                                  33,516,727
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                61,954,513
<SALES>                                     93,465,103
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            93,465,103
<CGS>                                       58,798,993
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               58,798,993
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            27,559,810
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                93,113
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             176,384
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              7,106,300
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,700,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,406,300
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,406,300
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .47
        

</TABLE>
1 The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 07-2394

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Leonardo Vargas-Gonzalez, * also known as Chilango, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: April 3, 2008 Filed: April 9, 2008

___________ Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Acknowledging that his plea subjected him to a statutory minimum prison term of 10 years, Leonardo Vargas-Gonzalez pleadedguilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine and cocaine. See21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(ii), (viii), 846. The district court 1 calculated an advisory Guidelines imprisonment range of 120-135 months, and sentenced Vargas-Gonzalez to 120 months. On appeal, his counsel seek s permission to withdraw and has filed a-2- brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the sentence is unreasonable in light of Vargas-Gonzalez’s Cat egory I criminal history and the lower sentences of some co-conspirators, and th at the requirement of a government motion to depart below the mandatory minimum vi olates the separation-of-powers doctrine.
We conclude that Vargas-Gonzalez’s se ntence is not unreasonable because the district court did not have discretion to sentence him below 120 months, absent a substantial-assistance motion by the government under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) or qualification for relief from the statutory minimum under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f). See United States v. Gregg , 451 F.3d 930, 937 (8th Cir. 2006) ; United States v. Chacon , 330 F.3d 1065, 1066 (8th Cir. 2003); see also United States v. Harris , 493 F.3d 928, 932 (8th Cir. 2007) (court of appeals accord s sentence within advisory Guidelines range presumption of reasonableness), cert. denied , 128 S. Ct. 1263 (2008). We have previously held that the requirement of a government motion to depart below the mandatory minimum does not violate the separation-of-powers doctrine. SeeUnited States v. Holbdy , 489 F.3d 910, 914 (8th Cir. 2007).
After reviewing the record i ndependently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. A ccordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We also grant couns el’s request to withdraw, subject to the condition that counsel comply with the require ments of Part V of this court’s Plan to Implement the Criminal Justice Act by a dvising Vargas-Gonzalez of the procedures for filing a petition for writ of certiorari pro se.

______________________________
Exhibit 99.1

                       Report of Independent Accountants


To the Board of Directors of Cambridge Electric Light Company:

We have reviewed the accompanying condensed balance sheet of Cambridge
Electric Light Company as of September 30, 1999 and the related condensed
statements of income for the three and nine-month periods ended September 30,
1999 and condensed cash flows for the nine-month period ended September 30,
1999.  We did not perform a review of the condensed statements of income for
the three and nine-month periods ended September 30, 1998 and cash flows for
the nine-month period ended September 30, 1998.  These financial statements
are the responsibility of management.

We conducted our review in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.  A review of interim
financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures
to financial data and making inquiries of persons responsible for accounting
and financial matters.  It is substantially less in scope than an audit
conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the
objective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial
statements taken as a whole.  Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that
should be made to the accompanying financial statements in order for them to
be in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.


Hartford, Connecticut                              PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
November 15, 1999
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 Reserve System

      ( print page 7092)    
                    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841*et seq.*) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.                

                    The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of Information Office at                     *https://www.federalreserve.gov/​foia/​request.htm.*                     Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).                

Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington DC 20551-0001, not later than February 25, 2021.

*A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco*                     (Sebastian Astrada, Director, Applications) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105-1579: 1.                     *St. Laurent Investments LLC, Vancouver, Washington;*                     to become a bank holding company by acquiring People's Bank of Commerce, Medford, Oregon.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 21, 2021.

Michele Taylor Fennell,

Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2021-01690 Filed 1-25-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

JAMES TRASK, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 12 C 4048

)

NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE )

COMPANY and AARP OPERATIONS, )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

James Trask Jr. (“Trask”) has filed a self-prepared Complaint against New York Life

Insurance Company (“New York Life”) and AARP Operations (“AARP”), advancing a claim

relating to New York Life’s insurance policies that had insured Trask’s now deceased wife

Wauconda Trask. This memorandum order is issued sua sponte because of a number of gaps

in the Complaint that need to be filled before it can be determined whether this District Court

has subject matter jurisdiction over Trask’s claim.

To begin with, this Court assumes that Trask is seeking relief in this District Court based

on diversity of citizenship – but if so, he has failed to identify the citizenship of any of the parties

(and as to “AARP Operations” he has failed to indicate what type of entity it is – that in turn will

tell what facts as to its state or states of citizenship may be relevant). Moreover, the Complaint

says nothing at all about the amount in controversy, which is also an essential element in

determining the existence of diversity jurisdiction.

In addition, Complaint ¶4 gives no indication of the date on which the previously-lapsed

policy (see Complaint ¶3) was reinstated, nor any indication as to the nature of the allegedly

false information that was given to Wauconda Trask at that time. That information is needed
both to determine the timeliness of Trask’s claim and to see whether he has advanced a

colorable claim. 

With Trask having failed in his obligation to confirm the existence of federal subject

matter jurisdiction, this Court could well dismiss the Complaint without prejudice. But it has no

desire to impose on Trask the obligation to pay a second $350 filing fee if the defects spoken of

here prove to be curable. Accordingly Trask is granted until June 15, 2012 to amend the

Complaint (or to file a self-contained Amended Complaint), failing which this Court would be

obligated to dismiss this action because of the failure to establish federal subject matter

jurisdiction.

___________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: May 30, 2012

2
### Overview/Summary 

To realign workload and resources, OCR has transferred responsibility for several   states between the enforcement offices. This realignment affects the following   offices and states:

**South Carolina:** The responsibility for new complaints, compliance   reviews, and technical assistance has been transferred from the Atlanta Office   to the District of Columbia Office.

**Oklahoma:** The responsibility for new complaints, compliance   reviews, and technical assistance has been transferred from the Dallas Office   to the Kansas City Office.

**Iowa and North Dakota:** The responsibility for new complaints,   compliance reviews, and technical assistance has been transferred from the Kansas   City Office to the Chicago Office.

**Montana:** The responsibility for new complaints, compliance   reviews, and technical assistance has been transferred from the Denver Office   to the Seattle Office.

Top
M. P. No. 75-5.

#### Brier Manufacturing Company *v.*John H. Norberg, *Tax Administrator.*

*Isadore Paisner,*plaintiff-respondent. *Julius C. Michaelson,*Attorney General, *Albert E. DeRobbio,*Asst. Attorney General, *Perry Shatkin,*Chief Legal Officer (Taxation), for defendant-petitioner.

Petition for writ of certiorari granted. Case is consolidated for the filing of briefs and hearing before this court with the case of *Brier Mfg. Co.*v. *Norberg,*114 R. I. 922, 332 A.2d 784 (1975).

Paolino and Joslin, JJ. not participating.
APPENDIX B 

16 REPORT NO. IG-07-015 

MANAGEMENT COMMENTS
#### Emanuel Lester, as Assignee, Respondent, v. Edward J. Ennis, as Surviving Executor of Serge Rubinstein, Deceased, Appellant.

Order entered on May 19, 1960, denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the fourth amended complaint herein pursuant to subdivision 4 of rule 106, rule 103 and subdivision 5 of rule 107 of the Rules of Civil Practice unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. No opinion. Concur—Botein, P. J., Rabin, Valente, McNally and Eager, JJ.
<PAGE>










                                                                  EXHIBIT 32.2



                            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 Quarterly Report of Federal Screw Works (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly Report"),
I, W. T. ZurSchmiede, Jr., Chairman of the Board, Chief Financial Officer,
Secretary 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 Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)); and

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




                                      /s/ W. T. ZurSchmiede, Jr.
                                      ______________________________________
                                      W. T. ZurSchmiede, Jr., Chairman,
                                      Chief Financial Officer and
                                      Secretary of Federal Screw Works



  May 14, 2004
  ------------
# Eiropas Savienības C 345/2015

| | ISSN 1977-0952 |
| --- | --- |
| Eiropas Savienības
  Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 345 |
| | |
| Izdevums latviešu valodā | Informācija un paziņojumi | 58. sējums2015. gada 18. oktobris |

ISSN 1977-0952

Eiropas Savienības

Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 345

Izdevums latviešu valodā

Informācija un paziņojumi

58. sējums2015. gada 18. oktobris

---

| Paziņojums Nr. | Saturs | Lappuse |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Paziņojumi |
| | EIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS IESTĀŽU UN STRUKTŪRU SNIEGTI PAZIŅOJUMI |
| | Padome |
| 2015/C 345/01 | Padomes paziņojums | 1 |

Paziņojums Nr.

Saturs

Lappuse

IV   Paziņojumi

EIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS IESTĀŽU UN STRUKTŪRU SNIEGTI PAZIŅOJUMI

Padome

2015/C 345/01

Padomes paziņojums

1

---

| LV | |
| --- | --- |

LV

---

IV Paziņojumi

EIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS IESTĀŽU UN STRUKTŪRU SNIEGTI PAZIŅOJUMI

Padome

| 18.10.2015 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 345/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.10.2015

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 345/1

---

PADOMES PAZIŅOJUMS

(2015/C 345/01)

Padome atzīmē, ka apņemšanās atcelt visas ar kodolmateriāliem saistītās ES sankcijas saskaņā ar Kopīgo visaptverošo rīcības plānu (KVRP) neskar KVRP paredzēto strīdu izšķiršanas mehānismu un ES sankciju atkārtotu ieviešanu gadījumā, ja Irāna būtiski neizpilda savas saistības saskaņā ar KVRP.

Ja Irāna būtiski neizpilda savas saistības saskaņā ar KVRP, Padome apņemas nekavējoties atkārtoti ieviest visas ar kodolmateriāliem saistītās ES sankcijas, kuras ir apturētas un/vai atceltas, pēc kopīga ieteikuma, ko Padomei adresē Eiropas Savienības Augstais pārstāvis ārlietās un drošības politikas jautājumos, Francija, Vācija un Apvienotā Karaliste.

---
Functional Statements > Office of Career, Technical, and Adult

## Division of Adult Education and Literacy

The Division of Adult Education and Literacy (DAEL) is the principal policy and program advisor to the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education (OCTAE) on all adult education matters, pursuant to the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA), Title II of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), related legislation, and Departmental regulations.  DAEL supports programs and other activities that help adults become literate, obtain the knowledge and skills necessary for employment and self-sufficiency, obtain a secondary school diploma, and transition to postsecondary education and training.  AEFLA also helps individuals who are English language learners improve their English proficiency and assists adults who are parents in obtaining the educational skills necessary to become full partners in the educational development of their children. DAEL has overall responsibility for providing a broad range of services specified in the Act, including providing technical and program improvement assistance to National, State, and local adult education systems, programs, and organizations and carrying out national leadership functions in adult education.

DAEL administers the Adult Education formula grant program to the States and provides States’ assistance to improve program quality and capacity. Critical responsibilities include interpreting national trends in the economy, workforce and education as they pertain to adult literacy and developing strategies for translating research into practice for millions of low-level literacy adults.  DAEL works with states and other constituents to ensure accountability and effective program performance, assists in the identification and analysis of best practices, and develops strategies for leveraging resources at the community level.DAEL is also responsible for administering the National Leadership Activities program and has the primary responsibility for ensuring that the requirements for providing technical assistance to help States and local providers meet the performance accountability requirements of the statute and carrying out research and evaluation of adult education and literacy activities are met.  Division staff, in collaboration with the Policy, Research and Evaluation Staff, provides day-to-day programmatic direction and support to adult education research and evaluation programs.

DAEL maintains on-going communication and strategic collaboration with other Divisions within OCTAE, POCs across the Department, and other Federal Agencies as well as develops reports and recommendations for U.S. participation in adult education and lifelong learning activities.

The Division is divided into the following three components:

- Accountability Branch
- Monitoring and Administration Branch
- Innovation and Improvement Branch

### Accountability Branch (AB)

### Monitoring and Administration Branch (MAB)

### Innovation and Improvement Branch (IIB)

TOP
* 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

August 17, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

MIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 05-50228

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RUBEN TINAJERO-RIVERA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:04-CR-1870

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

Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Ruben TinajeroRivera raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that a

prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. 

§ 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The

Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
#### Hill *v.*Duke *et al.*

February 26, 1913.

Equitable petition. Before Judge Brand. ■ Jackson superior court. October 5, 1911.

*J. A. B. Mahaffey, Cobb & Erwin,*and *John J. Striclclmd,*for plaintiff in error.

*H. E. Dem, J. S. Ayers,*and *Thomas J. Shackelford,*contra.

Atkinson, J.

1. The charge was substantially correct, and adjusted to the evidence. In-so far as proper, the requests to charge were covered by the general charge.

2. The evidence authorized the verdict) and there was no abuse of discretion in refusing to grant a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
<PAGE>
 
                                                                 EXHIBIT 23.1(B)
 
                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
 
  As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of our report included in this Form 10-KSB, into the Company's Form
S-8 Registration Statements filed on January 29, 1987 (Reg. No. 33-11627);
September 28, 1987 (Reg. No. 33-17359); March 17, 1988 (Reg. No. 33-20706);
June 30, 1989 (Reg. No. 33-29636); and June 23, 1992 (Reg. No. 33-48663).
 
/s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
 
Houston, Texas
November 16, 1995
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

PATRICK MARTINEZ,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 

 State.

 

§

§

§

 

§

§

§ 

 

§

'

'

No. 08-14-00242-CR

Appeal from the

171st District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 20130D04142)

 O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant’s third motion for extension of time to file the brief 

until August 8, 2015. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE 

APPELLANT’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Jaime E. Gandara, the Appellant’s Attorney, prepare 

the Appellant’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before August 8, 2015.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 8

th day of July, 2015.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, CJ, Rodriguez and Hughes, JJ.
#### 225.7704-3 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.

Appropriate solicitation provisions and contract clauses are prescribed as alternates to the Buy American-Trade Agreements-Balance of Payments Program solicitation provisions and contract clauses prescribed at 225.1101 and 225.7503.

[75 FR 81918, Dec. 29, 2010]