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

<ARTICLE>6
<LEGEND> THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED 
FROM THE FORM 10-Q AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS 
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
<MULTIPLIER>1
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                  SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>             903,131
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>            285,224
<RECEIVABLES>                           0
<ASSETS-OTHER>                        342
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>                7,534
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    293,100
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>                0
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>                 0
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>         243,695
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>               243,695
<SENIOR-EQUITY>                         0
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>          667,312
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>             106,982
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>             106,990
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>               0
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>                  0
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>                 0
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>                0
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>         (617,907)
<NET-ASSETS>                       49,405
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>                       0
<INTEREST-INCOME>                     286
<OTHER-INCOME>                          0
<EXPENSES-NET>                    315,788
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>          (315,502)
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>           55,079
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>        (202,948)
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>            (463,371)
<EQUALIZATION>                          0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>               0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>                0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>                   0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>                 0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>             8
<SHARES-REINVESTED>                     0
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>           (463,428)
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>                 0
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>               0
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>                 0
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>              0
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>               6,400
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<GROSS-EXPENSE>                   316,488
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>              281,119
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>                   9
<PER-SHARE-NII>                        (2)
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>                 0 <F1>
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>                    0
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>               0
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>                    0
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>                     7
<EXPENSE-RATIO>                     112.3
<AVG-DEBT-OUTSTANDING>                  0
<AVG-DEBT-PER-SHARE>                    0
<FN>
A zero value is used since the change in net unrealized fair value is not 
allocated to General Partners and Limited Partners as it is not taxable.  
Only taxable gains or losses are allocated in accordance with the 
Partnership Agreement.
</FN>

</TABLE>
Case 1:06-cv-00786-MHT-CSC Document 6 Filed 09/11/2006 Page 1 of 1
§ 217.2 Priorities and allocations authority. ( a ) Section 201 of E.O. 12919 (59 FR 29525) delegates the President's authority under section 101 of the Defense Production Act to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts and orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense to: ( 1 ) The Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;
( 2 ) The Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;
( 3 ) The Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;
( 4 ) The Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;
( 5 ) The Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and
( 6 ) The Secretary of Commerce for all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.
( b ) Section 202 of E.O. 12919 states that the priorities and allocations authority delegated in section 201 of this order may be used only to support programs that have been determined in writing as necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense: ( 1 ) By the Secretary of Defense with respect to military production and construction, military assistance to foreign nations, stockpiling, outer space, and directly related activities;
( 2 ) By the Secretary of Energy with respect to energy production and construction, distribution and use, and directly related activities; and
( 3 ) By the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to essential civilian needs supporting national defense, including civil defense and continuity of government and directly related activities.
#### § 490.603 Prohibited acts.

It is unlawful for any person to violate any provision of sections 501, 503(b), 507, 514 of the Act, or any regulations issued under such sections.

[72 FR 12964, Mar. 20, 2007]
§ 652.37 Period of decertification. The period of decertification will not exceed 3 years in duration and will be decided by the decertifying official, either the Deputy Chief for Programs or the Chief of NRCS, as applicable, based on their weighing of all relevant facts and the seriousness of the reasons for decertification, mitigating factors, if any, and the following general guidelines: ( a ) For failures in the provision of technical service for which there are no mitigating factors, *e.g.*, no remedial action by the technical service provider, a maximum period of three years decertification;
( b ) For repeated failures in the provision of technical assistance for which there are mitigating factors, *e.g.*, the technical service provider has taken remedial action to the satisfaction of NRCS, a maximum period of one to two years decertification; and
( c ) For a violation of Certification Agreement terms, *e.g.*, failure to possess technical competency for a listed practice, a period of one year or less, if the technical service provider can master such competency within a year period.
[75 FR 6845, Feb. 12, 2010, as amended at 79 FR 44640, Aug. 1, 2014]
Case 3:06-cv-00751-WKW-TFM Document 1 Filed 08/23/2006 Page 1 of 8
Case 3:06-cv-00751-WKW-TFM Document 1 Filed 08/23/2006 Page 2 of 8
Case 3:06-cv-00751-WKW-TFM Document 1 Filed 08/23/2006 Page 3 of 8
Case 3:06-cv-00751-WKW-TFM Document 1 Filed 08/23/2006 Page 4 of 8
Case 3:06-cv-00751-WKW-TFM Document 1 Filed 08/23/2006 Page 5 of 8
Case 3:06-cv-00751-WKW-TFM Document 1 Filed 08/23/2006 Page 6 of 8
Case 3:06-cv-00751-WKW-TFM Document 1 Filed 08/23/2006 Page 7 of 8
Case 3:06-cv-00751-WKW-TFM Document 1 Filed 08/23/2006 Page 8 of 8
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-13-00101-CR

____________________

EX PARTE DANIEL ARCENEAUX

_______________________________________________________ ______________

On Appeal from the 359th District Court 

Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 12-09-10077-CR 

________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Daniel Arceneaux appealed an order denying his application for a writ of 

habeas corpus for a reduction of a pre-trial bond. Counsel for the appellant 

subsequently notified the Court that the underlying criminal case has been resolved 

through a plea bargain agreement. Issues concerning pre-trial bail are moot when 

the accused is no longer subject to pre-trial confinement. See Martinez v. State, 

826 S.W.2d 620, 620 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992); Bennet v. State, 818 S.W.2d 199, 
2

200 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, no pet.). The appeal is dismissed as 

moot.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

 ________________________________

 CHARLES KREGER 

 Justice

 

Opinion Delivered April 24, 2013

Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
<PAGE>

<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, James J. Houtz, President of Sionix Corporation, certify that:

         1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Sionix
Corporation:

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

         3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly represent in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

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

                  a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during this period in which the quarterly report is being prepared;

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

                  c. presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

         5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent function):

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

                  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
internal controls; and

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

Date: February 23, 2004

 /s/ James J. Houtz
 ---------------------------
     James J. Houtz
     President
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Helaine M. Kaplan,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed inrespect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the COMM 2013-LC6Mortgage Trust (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

 

2. Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required tobe provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is includedin the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except asotherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties:

 

Midland LoanServices, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer,Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as Special Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation, as Trustee and Certificate Administrator, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Custodian, and Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, asOperating Advisor.

 

 

 

Dated: October 30,2019

 

/s/ Helaine M. Kaplan

 

President

(senior officer in chargeof securitization of the depositor)
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NOTHERN DIVISION 

DONNA DORSEY DAVIS, etc. ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO: 

RICHARD M. DORSEY, etc., ) 2:06CV766-MHT 

 and CD & O, LLC, etc., ) 

 Defendants. ) 

 

 NOTICE OF DEPOSITION 

 TO COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR ALL PARTIES 

 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Plaintiff will take the testimony of 

Defendant, Richard M. Dorsey, by deposition upon oral examination for the 

purpose of discovery or for use as evidence in this action in accordance with the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

 Said deposition will be held at the law offices of CLEVELAND & COWLEY, 

P.C., 744 East Main Street, Prattville, Alabama 36067, on March 12, 2007 at 

10:00 o’clock a.m. and shall be taken before a certified Court Reporter who is 

authorized to administer oath under the Laws of the State of Alabama. 

 This 28th day of February, 2007. 

 

 _s/Lindsay B. Erwin__________ 

 Lindsay B. Erwin 

 ASB – 5299-y59e 

 Attorney for the Plaintiff 

Meacham, Earley & Fowler, P.C. 

5704 Veterans Parkway 

Columbus, Georgia 31904 

(706) 576-4064 

Case 2:06-cv-00766-MHT-TFM Document 19 Filed 03/08/2007 Page 1 of 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I hereby certify that I have mailed a true and correct copy of the foregoing to 

all Attorneys of record, by first class U.S. Mail, this the 28th day of February, 2007 

Postage prepaid and properly address to: 

Clifford W. Cleveland James E. Roberts 

Post Office Box 680689 4908 Cahaba River Road 

Prattville, Alabama 36068 Birmingham, Alabama 35243 

 

 This 28th day of February, 2007. 

 

 __s/Lindsay B. Erwin_____ 

 Lindsay B. Erwin 

Case 2:06-cv-00766-MHT-TFM Document 19 Filed 03/08/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### In the Matter of Heidi Vitale, on Behalf of Herself and Her Minor Child, Petitioner, v Joseph D’Elia, as Commissioner of the Nassau County Department of Social Services, et al., Respondents.

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent State Commissioner of Social Services, dated November 24, 1978 and made after a statutory fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency denying petitioner’s application for a grant of aid to dependent children. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements. The finding by the State commissioner that petitioner’s automobile is a valuable asset not essential to the needs of petitioner and her dependent child and thus an available resource for their support is supported by substantial evidence on the record. This case is distinguishable from *Matter of Gunn v Blum*(48 NY2d 58), in that the instant matter involves a question of eligibility for, rather than discontinuance of, public assistance. Damiani, J. P., Gibbons, Rabin and Margett, JJ., concur.
#### Mike Sufa and Regina Sufa, Appellees, v. Ladislaw Vacek et al., Defendants. Appeal of Ladislaw Vacek and Marie Vacek, Appellants, Gen. No. 41,010. Appeal of Marie J. Tucek and Vacek and Company, Appellants, Gen. No. 41,075. Cross Appeal of Mike Sufa and Regina Sufa, Cross Appellants.

Gen. Nos. 41,010, 41,075.

opinion filed July 2, 1940.

Grablowski & Kanak, for appellants; Ode L. Rankin, of counsel; Heile, Cavender, Milchrist & Kaiser and T. J. Szmergalski, for appellees; H. L. Cavender, of counsel.

Opinion by

Justice HcSurely.

“Not to be published in full.’’
Exhibit
32





CERTIFICATION
OF OFFICERS


OF SIONIX
CORPORATION


PURSUANT
TO 18 USC § 1350





Pursuant
to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and (b) of
Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) each of the
undersigned officers of Sionix Corporation (the “Company”) does hereby certify,
to such officer’s knowledge, that:





The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2008 of the
Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





Information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:  February
23, 2009




/s/ James J. HoutzJames
      J. Houtz, President/s/ Rodney AndersonRodney
      Anderson, Chief Financial Officer
#### State of Kansas, *Appellee,*v. Ronald L. Dunn, *Appellant.*

No. 47,963

Opinion filed January 24, 1976.

*John J. Ambrosio,*of Topeka, argued the cause, and *Craig M. Cornish,*Legal Intern, was with him on the brief for appellant.

*Gene M. Olander,*district attorney, argued the cause and *Curt T. Schneider,*attorney general, was with him on the brief for appellee.

*Harry F. Swanger, Esq.,*and *L. Joseph Garavaglia,*Legal Intern, National Juvenile Law Center, Saint Louis University School of Law, St. Louis, Missouri, were on the brief amicus curiae.

Fatzer. C. J.

Affirmed.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 11355 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

JARED WILLIAM SMITH

,

Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:18

- CR

- 324

- 1

Before JONES, CLEMENT, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Jared William Smith has moved for

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California

, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).

Smith has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant

portions of the record reflected therein , as well as Smith ’ s response . We concur

* 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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 23, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-11355 Document: 00515500984 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/23/2020No. 19

- 11355

2 with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for

appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 19-11355 Document: 00515500984 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/23/2020
Subpart 1814.2—Solicitation of Bids    **Parent topic:** PART 1814—SEALED BIDDING1814.201-6 Solicitation provisions.1814.201-670 NASA solicitation provisions.       (a) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.214–70, Caution to Offerors Furnishing Descriptive Literature, in invitations for bids. See FAR 52.214–21, Descriptive Literature.          (b) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.214–71, Grouping for Aggregate Award, in invitations for bids, except for construction, when it is in the Government's best interest not to make award for less than specified quantities solicited for certain items or groupings of certain items. Insert the item numbers and/or descriptions applicable for the particular procurement.          (c) The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.214–72, Full Quantities, in invitations for bids, except for construction, when it is in the Government's best interest not to make award for less than the full quantities solicited.          (d) If a pre-bid conference is planned, the contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.215–77, Preproposal/Pre-bid Conference. See 1815.209–70(a).
§ 52.80 Contents of applications; additional technical information. The application must contain: ( a ) The proposed inspections, tests, and analyses, including those applicable to emergency planning, that the licensee shall perform, and the acceptance criteria that are necessary and sufficient to provide reasonable assurance that, if the inspections, tests, and analyses are performed and the acceptance criteria met, the facility has been constructed and will be operated in conformity with the combined license, the provisions of the Act, and the Commission's rules and regulations. ( 1 ) If the application references an early site permit with ITAAC, the early site permit ITAAC must apply to those aspects of the combined license which are approved in the early site permit.
( 2 ) If the application references a standard design certification, the ITAAC contained in the certified design must apply to those portions of the facility design which are approved in the design certification.
( 3 ) If the application references an early site permit with ITAAC or a standard design certification or both, the application may include a notification that a required inspection, test, or analysis in the ITAAC has been successfully completed and that the corresponding acceptance criterion has been met. The Federal Register notification required by § 52.85 must indicate that the application includes this notification.
( b ) An environmental report, either in accordance with 10 CFR 51.50(c) if a limited work authorization under 10 CFR 50.10 is not requested in conjunction with the combined license application, or in accordance with §§ 51.49 and 51.50(c) of this chapter if a limited work authorization is requested in conjunction with the combined license application.
( c ) If the applicant wishes to request that a limited work authorization under 10 CFR 50.10 be issued before issuance of the combined license, the application must include the information otherwise required by 10 CFR 50.10, in accordance with either 10 CFR 2.101(a)(1) through (a)(4), or 10 CFR 2.101(a)(9).
( d ) The applicant's plans for implementing the requirements of § 50.155 of this chapter including a schedule for achieving full compliance with these requirements, and a description of the equipment upon which the strategies and guidelines required by § 50.155(b)(1) of this chapter rely, including the planned locations of the equipment and how the equipment meets the requirements of § 155(c) of this chapter.
[72 FR 49517, Aug. 28, 2007, as amended at 72 FR 57447, Oct. 9, 2007; 74 FR 13970, Mar. 27, 2009; 84 FR 39719, Aug. 8, 2019]