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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           9,692
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  402,882
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               412,574
<PP&E>                                         808,321
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,221,325
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,033
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          130,744
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       584,588
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,221,325
<SALES>                                        211,428
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               228,342
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   89,856
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,983
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,784
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                182,728
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            182,728
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   182,728
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.67
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SHAREEF KINSLOW, Defendant Below, Appellant,

v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § No. 492, 2018 § § Court Below—Superior Court § of the State of Delaware § § Cr. ID No. N1709012766 § § § §

Submitted: October 26, 2018 Decided: November 8, 2018

ORDER On September 21, 2018, the appellant f iled a notice of appeal from his August 16, 2018 sentencing for a violation of proba tion. A timely notice of appeal was due by September 17, 2018. 1 On September 25, 2018, the Senior Court Clerk issued a notice directing the appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed as untimely filed. After the Senior Court Clerk informed the appellant that the notice show cause would be held in abeyance pe nding the filing of a complete motion to proceed in forma pauperis and the appellant filed a completed motion to proceed in

1 See Supr. Ct. R. 6(a)(iii) (requiring notice of appeal to be filed within thirty days of sentencing); Supr. Ct. R. 11(a) (providing that if the last da y of the time period prescribed by the Rules falls on the weekend or a holiday then the time period runs until the end of the next day the Clerk’s office is open).2 forma pauperis , the Chief Deputy Clerk directed the appellant to respond to the notice to show cause by October 25, 2018. The appellant has not responded to the

notice to show cause. Dismissal of this appeal is therefore d eemed to be unopposed. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rules 3(b)(2) and 29(b), that this appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT: /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Justice
252.237-7011 Preparation History.       As prescribed in                 237.7003             (a) and (a)(8), use the following clause:          PREPARATION HISTORY (DEC 1991)          For each body prepared, or for each casket handled in a group interment, the Contractor shall state briefly the results of the embalming process on a certificate furnished by the Contracting Officer.          (End of clause)    **Parent topic:** 252.237 RESERVED
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

RALPH WILSON LINGO, )

)

 Petitioner, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:06-CV-703-MHT

)

WILLIE R. COLLINS, et al., )

)

 Respondents. )

ORDER

Upon review of the notice filed by the petitioner on April 11, 2007 (Court Doc. No.

29), and in the interest of justice, it is

ORDERED that on or before April 30, 2007 the respondents shall furnish the

plaintiff with copies of their November 8, 2006 response (Court Doc. No. 21) and answer

(Court Doc. No. 22). The respondents are advised that the petitioner lists his current

address as Elmore Correctional Facility, P. O. Box 1107, Elmore, Alabama 36025-1107.

The Clerk is hereby DIRECTED to furnish the petitioner with copies of the following court

documents: 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 23 and 25. 

Done this 13th day of April, 2007.

 /s/ Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY 

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00703-MHT-CSC Document 30 Filed 04/13/2007 Page 1 of 2
2

Case 1:06-cv-00703-MHT-CSC Document 30 Filed 04/13/2007 Page 2 of 2
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r 

### 135564(31) Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, J ustices 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 135564 COA: 277913 Jackson CC: 99-097252-FH WILLIAM T. CARLESS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for rec onsideration of this Court’s June 23, 2008 order is considered, and it is DENIED, beca use it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.

d0915 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 22, 2008

Clerk
Case 1:06-cv-00696-MHT-TFM Document 10 Filed 08/21/2006 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:06-cv-00696-MHT-TFM Document 10 Filed 08/21/2006 Page 2 of 6
Case 1:06-cv-00696-MHT-TFM Document 10 Filed 08/21/2006 Page 3 of 6
Case 1:06-cv-00696-MHT-TFM Document 10 Filed 08/21/2006 Page 4 of 6
Case 1:06-cv-00696-MHT-TFM Document 10 Filed 08/21/2006 Page 5 of 6
Case 1:06-cv-00696-MHT-TFM Document 10 Filed 08/21/2006 Page 6 of 6
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                               ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


      In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of First Community
Financial Corporation, (the "Company" for the period ended September 30, 2002,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report", I, Richard
R. Leitzel, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. [sect]1350, as
adopted pursuant to [sect]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.    To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of the
operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.

Date: November 12, 2002          By: /s/  Richard R. Leitzel
      -----------------              -------------------------
                                     Richard R. Leitzel, Chief Financial Officer
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-19-00227-CV

DRUE ALLEN HOLLIS, Appellant

V.

MESA SPRINGS, L.L.C., Appellee

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 352nd District 

Court

of Tarrant County (352-301866-18)

August 22, 2019

Per Curiam

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that the 

appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for want of 

jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

 _______________________________

JEREMIAH W. GREEN *

Plaintiff, *

 v. * 2:06-CV-667-WKW

 

AJA ROBERTS *

Defendant. *

 _______________________________

ORDER ON MOTION

Upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave for Discovery to Identify Multiple

Other “Doe” Defendants, and for good cause, it is 

ORDERED that the motion (Doc. No. 22) be and is hereby DENIED. The request may

be reconsidered if warranted by further developments in this case.

Done, this 15th day of November 2006.

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00667-WKW-WC Document 25 Filed 11/15/2006 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         509,158
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               398,781
<PP&E>                                      22,146,980
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,133,972
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,920,947
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          384,131
<BONDS>                                     13,062,254
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,474,562<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,920,947
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,108,864
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,405,555
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             837,242
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (133,933)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (133,933)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (133,933)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (3.47)<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>This entity is a limited partnership. The Other Stockholders Equity line
represents total Partnership equity.
<F2>The EPS - Primary line represents net loss per limited partnership unit.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3479 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3479

To suspend temporarily the duty on numerous other seals made of rubber 
 or silicone, and covered with, or reinforced with, a fabric material.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 8, 2006

 Mr. Brownback introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To suspend temporarily the duty on numerous other seals made of rubber 
 or silicone, and covered with, or reinforced with, a fabric material.

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

SECTION 1. NUMEROUS OTHER SEALS MADE OF RUBBER OR SILICONE, AND COVERED 
              WITH, OR REINFORCED WITH, A FABRIC MATERIAL.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

      

``      9902.59.11        Numerous other seals    Free      No change       No change       On or before 12/
                           made of rubber or                                                 31/2009          ''
                           silicone, and covered                                                               .
                           with, or reinforced
                           with, a fabric
                           material (provided
                           for in subheading
                           5911.90.00)..........

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
**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 Centenary International Corporation
      (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
      I, Carlos
      Fabian De Sousa ,
      Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350,
      as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
      the
      best of my knowledge and belief:





(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/
                Carlos Fabian De SousaCarlos
                Fabian De SousaChief
                Executive OfficerAugust
                6, 2008





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 has been
      provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. The foregoing
      certifications are accompanying the Company's Form 10-Q solely pursuant to
      section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
      section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and are not being
      filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure
      document.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. Case No: 5:88cr5040/RV 

 5:10cv284/RV/EMT

KUNTA MUWWAKILL,

____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated August 4, 2011 (doc. 299). The parties have been furnished a copy of the

Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to

Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of all timely

filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any timely filed objections thereto

timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by 

reference in this order.

2. The Government’s motion to dismiss (doc. 296) is GRANTED, and Defendant’s

amended motion to vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (doc. 293), is DENIED and DISMISSED,

as this court lacks jurisdiction to consider a successive motion absent permission from the Eleventh

Circuit.

3. Defendant’s alternative motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (doc. 298) is DENIED

without prejudice to its refiling when and if Amendment 750 takes effect. 
Page 2 of 2

DONE AND ORDERED this 20th day of September, 2011.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No. 5:88cr5040/RV & 5:10cv284/RV/EMT
Case 1:06-cv-00643-MHT-SRW Document 17 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-00643-MHT-SRW Document 17 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-00643-MHT-SRW Document 17-3 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 1 of 1
U.S. Department ofTransportation Federal Aviation Administration Office ofAdjudication August23,2016 VIA FAX and U.S. Mail Amanda Bruchs Sheridan, Esq. Federal AviationAdministration EnforcementDivision,AGC-300 800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591 800 Independence Ave., S.W, Rm 323 Washington, D.C. 20591

WilliamJ. Dobitsch, Jr. President Endless MountainAir, Inc. Seamans Airport 65 Windsock Lane Factoryville, PA 18419 Re: Endless MountainAir, Inc., DMS No. FAA-2013-0848 Dear Mr. Dobitsch and Ms. Sheridan: The Office of Adjudication received the Endless Mountain Air, Inc. ("EMA") letter dated August 22, 2016, requesting access to Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR"). Agency counsel is directed to inform this Office promptly, within 5 business days ofthe date ofthis letter, ifit is willingto discuss possible ADR inthis case. The EMA letter also requested an extension oftime to file an "appeal brief' during the ADR process. Consistent with my letter dated July 27, 2016, we are treating EMA's initial filing as its appeal briefand there will be no extension oftime for that purpose. The Agency's reply brief yurrently is due on August 31,2016. Regarding the Agency's cross appeal, as explained in my letter ofJuly 27, 2016, The Agency filed a cross-appeal brief on July 14, 2016, and EMA's reply briefcurrently is due to be filed today. The above due dates for EMA's reply brief and for the Agency's reply brief are suspended pending the parties' consideration and possible use ofADR. IfADR is not attempted, or is not successful inresolving this matter, new due dates for the above briefs will be established. Sincerely,



# ~~ Anthony

.Palladino Director and Administrative Judge Office ofDispute Resolutionfor Acquisition
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                            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 First Community Financial
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, James R. McLaughlin, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S)1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

                                            /s/ James R. McLauhglin
                                                ------------------------

                                            James R. McLaughlin
                                            Chief Executive Officer
                                            August 9, 2002
Case 2:06-cv-00704-WKW-CSC Document 5 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00704-WKW-CSC Document 5 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00704-WKW-CSC Document 5 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 3 of 3
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3205 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1, propene, 1,1,2,3,3,3-hexafluoro-, 

telomers with chlorotrifluoroethene, oxidized, reduced, ethyl ester, hydrolyzed. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 25, 2006 

Mr. LAUTENBERG introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1, propene, 1,1,2,3,3,3- 

hexafluoro-, telomers with chlorotrifluoroethene, oxidized, 

reduced, ethyl ester, hydrolyzed. 

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

3 SECTION 1. 1, PROPENE, 1,1,2,3,3,3-HEXAFLUORO-, 

4 TELOMERS WITH 

5 CHLOROTRIFLUOROETHENE, OXIDIZED, RE6 DUCED, ETHYL ESTER, HYDROLYZED. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

8 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
2 

•S 3205 IS 

1 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

2 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.39.21 1, propene, 1,1,2,3,3,3-hexafluoro-, 

telomers with chlorotrifluoroethene, 

oxidized, reduced, ethyl ester, hydrolyzed 

(CAS No. 220182–27–4) (provided for in 

subheading 3907.20) ............................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

4 this section shall apply with respect to goods entered, or 

5 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

6 the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
Defendants’ Objection to Deadlines (Doc. 35) was filed as a “Motion for Extension of 1

Deadline.”

Plaintiffs’ counsel notified the court via e-mail that he has no objections to the requested

2

amendment. The e-mail was received by the court’s law clerk January 26, 2007. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

NICHOLAS STRICKLAND, et al., )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) 1:06-CV-00682-TFM

)

CHAMPION ENTERPRISES, INC., et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

ORDER

Upon review of the Objection to Deadlines, filed by Defendant Champion 1

Enterprises, Inc. (Doc. 35, filed January 24, 2007), and notice by Plaintiffs’ counsel that there

are no objections, it is, for good cause, 

2

ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion styled as Objection to Deadlines is

GRANTED. As such, Section 8 of the Uniform Scheduling Order (Doc. 34) shall be

amended as follows:

SECTION 8. The parties shall disclose to each other the identity of

ANY person who may be used at trial to present evidence under Rules 701,

702, 703, or 705, and provide the reports of retained experts or witnesses

whose duties as an employee of the party regularly involve giving expert

testimony, required by Rule 26(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 36 Filed 01/30/2007 Page 1 of 2
The parties shall comply fully with all requirements of Rule 26(a)(2) in

regard to disclosure of expert testimony.

From Plaintiff(s): February 2, 2007

From Defendant(s): Thirty (30) days following the deposition of

plaintiffs’ experts

DONE this 30th day of January, 2007.

/s/Terry F. Moorer 

 TERRY F. MOORER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00682-TFM Document 36 Filed 01/30/2007 Page 2 of 2