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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     US Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.00
<CASH>                                         7,627,523
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  8,579,598
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    10,785,588
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               30,222,902
<PP&E>                                         8,117,809
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 41,361,720
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          5,205,935
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    2,410
<COMMON>                                       120,941
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   41,361,720
<SALES>                                        58,037,159
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  29,478,372
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               18,841,038
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             411,037
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                9,306,512
<INCOME-TAX>                                   383,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            8,923,512
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   8,923,512
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .70
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .70
        


</TABLE>
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


L\_2007310EN.01002202.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 28.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 310/22 |

---

Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2796/95 of 4 December 1995 amending Annex II of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 laying down a Community procedure for the establishment of maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin

(
[Official Journal of the European Union L 290 of 5 December 1995](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_1995_290_R_TOC)
)

On page 3, in the Annex, first column of the table, sixth line:

for:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| ‘3.6. | Benzoyl benzoate’, |

read:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| ‘3.6. | Benzyl benzoate’. |

---
§ 2705.7 Agency review of request for correction or amendment of the record. Within ten working days of the receipt of the request to correct or to amend the record, the Executive Director will acknowledge in writing such receipt and promptly either— ( a ) Make any correction or amendment to that portion of the record which the individual believes is not accurate, relevant, timely, or complete; or
( b ) Inform the individual of the Executive Director's refusal to correct or to amend the record in accordance with the request, and the procedures established by the Commission for the individual to request a review of that refusal.
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S

N O . A P
- 7 6 , 5 7 9

E X P A R T E R O N A L D L A M A R S M I T H , A p p l i c a n t

O N A P P L I C A T I O N F O R A W R I T O F H A B E A S C O R P U S C A U S E N O . 2 0 1 0
- 2 9
- C 2 I N T H E 5 4 D I S T R I C T C O U R T T H F R O M M C L E N N A N C O U N T Y

P e r c u r i a m . O P I N I O N
P u rsuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Proced u re , t h e cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte
Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applican t wa s co n victed of assault and
sentenc ed to fiftee n y ear s’ imprisonment. Applicant contends that his counsel rende red ineffe ctive assistance b ec au s e he failed to timely file a notice of appea l. We rema nded this application to the trial court for finding s of fac t and conclusions of law

. The trial court has deter

mined that trial counsel failed to timely file a notice of appea l. We2

find, there fore , that Applica n t is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time appea l of the judgme nt of conviction in Cause No. 2010-29-C2 from the 54th J udicial District Court of McL ennan County

. Applicant is or dere d returne d to that time at which he may g ive a written notice of appea l

s o that he may then, with the aid of counsel, obtain a meaning ful appea l. All time limit s shall b e calc ulated as if the sentenc e had been imposed on the date on which the mandate of this Court issues.
We hold that, should Applicant desire to prosec ute an appea l, he must take aff irmative steps to file

a wr itten notice of a

ppeal in the tria l court within 30 day s after the mandate of this Court issues.

Deliver ed: J une 15, 2011 Do Not Publish
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 942 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 942

  To modify the boundaries for a certain empowerment zone designation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 20, 2007

Ms. Snowe (for herself and Ms. Collins) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To modify the boundaries for a certain empowerment zone designation.

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

SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF BOUNDARY OF AROOSTOOK COUNTY EMPOWERMENT 
              ZONE.

    (a) In General.--The Aroostook County empowerment zone shall 
include, in addition to the area designated as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the remaining area of the county not included in 
such designation, notwithstanding the size requirement of section 
1392(a)(3)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the population 
requirements of section 1392(a)(1)(B) of such Code.
    (b) Effective Date.--Subsection (a) shall take effect as of the 
effective date of the designation of the Aroostook County empowerment 
zone by the Secretary of Agriculture.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Public Service Commission, Respondent, against New York Central Railroad Company, Appellant.

Argued April 22, 1937;

decided May 25, 1937.

*Kenneth Crehle*for appellant.

*Gay H. Brown, Sherman C. Ward, Sidney Kaballdn*and *Laurence J. Olmsted*for respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ.
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________**
No. 23

- 30825

**____________ Kentrell Parker,**  on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated **; Farrell Sampier,** on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated **; Reginald George; John Tonubbee,** on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated **; Otto Barrera,** on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated **; Clyde Carter,** on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated **; Edward Giovanni,** on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated **; Ricky D. Davis,** on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated **; Lionel Tolbert,** on be half of themselves and all others similarly situated **; Rufus White,** on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated **; Shannon Hurd; Alton Adams; Ian Cazenave; Edward Washington; Alton**  **Batiste,**

Plaintiffs

— Appellees **,**

versus

**Tim Hooper,** Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, in his official capacity **; Ashli Oliveaux,**  Assistant Warden for Health Services, in her official capacity **; James M. LeBlanc,** Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections, in his off icial capacity **; Randy Lavespere,** Medical Doctor **; Stacye Falgout; Paul Toce; Bill Hawkins; Cynthia Park, ACNP; The Louisiana Department of**  **Public Safety and Corrections,**

Defendants

— Appellants

**.** United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 6, 2024
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-30825 Document: 156 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/06/20242 **______________________________** Appeal from the United Sta tes District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana USDC No. 3:15

- CV

- 318

**______________________________**
ORDER

Before **Jones ,**  **Haynes ,**  and **Douglas ,**  Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** It is ORDERED that the Remedial Order entered by the
district court on November 6, 2023, is STAYED pending further
order of this court. Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 426 (2009). In deciding to stay the Remedial Order, the panel expresses no opinion on th e underlying merits of the case. Case: 23-30825 Document: 156 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/06/2024
#### § 2700.50 Assignment of Judges.

Judges shall be assigned cases in rotation as far as practicable.
#### Matthew LEWIS *v.*STATE of Arkansas

5624

471 S.W. 2d 349

Opinion delivered October 11, 1971

*129
      *Leonard C. Smead,*for appellant.

*Ray Thornton,*Atty. Gen., by: *John D. Bridgforth,*Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

In 1969 the appellant was charged with first degree murder, committed in the perpetration of robbery. Upon the advice of employed counsel the appellant pleaded guilty to the charge, apparently with the understanding that the prosecution would not seek the death penalty. A jury was empaneled, which found the offense to be murder in the first degree and fixed the punishment at life imprisonment.

In 1970 the appellant filed the present petition for postconviction relief under Criminal Procedure Rule 1. Ark. Stat. Ann., Vol. 3A, Supp. 1969, p. 91. He asserted that at the original hearing the State was erroneously allowed to introduce a confession that had not been made voluntarily. The trial judge denied the petition under subparagraph (C) of Rule 1, finding that the original record conclusively showed that the prisoner was entitled to no relief.

We find no error. Rule 1 is not intended to provide a prisoner with a new hearing upon an issue of fact explored at the trial on the merits. *Cox*v. *State,*243 Ark. 60, 418 S. W. 2d 799 (1967). At the original trial the court found, after a *Denno*hearing, that the confession was voluntary. Later on the appellant, with the guidance of counsel, took the stand and testified, among other things, that he had signed the confession voluntarily. The same judge presided in both instances. In our opinion he was correct in denying the petition under subparagraph (C) of the rule.

*130In this court the appellant’s court-appointed counsel attaches to his brief an unsworm letter and statement in which the appellant again asserts that his confession was not voluntary. These documents are not in the record, are not properly before us, and are not entitled to consideration by this court. A Rule 1 proceeding is comparatively informal, but the rules of evidence are not to be ignored. Testimony, to be admissible, must be under oath and subject to cross-examination. We attach no weight to *ex parte*statements such as those attached to the appellant’s brief.

Affirmed.
#### CAMBRIDGE HILLS LAND CO v EUCLID (Village)

Ohio Appeals. 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co

No. 10103.

Decided November 18, 1929

Messrs. Chas. S. Reed and A. L. Steuer, Cleveland, for Cambridge Hills Land Co.

Mr. Stanley L. Orr, Cleveland, for Euclid (Village).

PER CURIAM

The plaintiff seeks to enjoin these various defendants from collecting certain asssessments in connection with improvements installed in and about land owned by the plaintiff. In the brief of counsel for Euclid Village it is pointed out that it is nowhere alleged in the petition that the plaintiff had made objection to the Village Council against the assessments. Authorities are cited, to the effect that the filing of such objections is a prerequisite to any equitable relief sought in the court.

> Bashore vs. Brown, 108 OS., page 18.

> Cuyahoga Falls vs. Beck, 110 OS. 82.

A perusal of the petition in its entirety discloses that it is claimed by the plaintiff that the assessments were sought in connection with the installing of certain sewers on the land of the plaintiff; that certain pipes were installed, but no outlet was provided. In effect the petition alleges that no sewer at all was constructed. In other words, that the improvement for which the assessments are claimed was never installed. It goes beyond the claim that the assessments were not commensurate with the benefits conferred. It alleges in substance that no improvement whatever was installed. This, in our opinion, states a cause of action.

The objection to the introduction of any evidence is, therefore, overruled.

Vickery, PJ., Levine and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
#### § 38.73 Responsibility for developing and publishing complaint processing procedures for service providers.

The Governor or the LWDA grant recipient, as provided in the State's Nondiscrimination Plan, must develop and publish, on behalf of its service providers, the complaint processing procedures required in § 38.72. The service providers must then follow those procedures.
----

----

I Meddelanden

Kommissionen

----

Eurons växelkurs (1)

24 juni 2004

(2004/C 166/01)

1 Euro= 

----

(1)

Källa: Referensväxelkurs offentliggjord av Europeiska centralbanken.

----

----

Översikt över gemenskapsbeslut om försäljningstillstånd för läkemedel fr.o.m. 15 maj 2004 t.o.m. 15 juni 2004

(Offentliggörande i enlighet med artikel 12 eller artikel 34 i rådets förordning (EEG) nr 2309/93 (1))

(2004/C 166/02)

Utfärdande av försäljningstillstånd (artikel 12 i rådets förordning (EEG) nr 2309/93) godkännes

Ändring av försäljningstillstånd (artikel 12 i rådets förordning (EEG) nr 2309/93) godkännes

----

(1)EGT L 214, 24.8.1993, s. 1

----

----

Förhandsanmälan av en koncentration

(Ärende COMP/M.3505 – TCL/Alcatel)

Ärendet kan komma att behandlas enligt förenklat förfarande

(2004/C 166/03)

(Text av betydelse för EES)

----

(1)EGT L 24, 29.1.2004, s. 1.

(2)EGT C 217, 29.7.2000, s. 32. Rådets förordning (EEG) nr 4064/89 har ersatts av rådets förordning (EG) nr 139/2004.

----

----

Beslut om att inte göra invändningar mot en anmäld koncentration

(Ärende nr COMP/M.3391 – XCHANGING/Deutsche Bank/ETB JV)

(2004/C 166/04)

(Text av betydelse för EES)

Kommissionen beslutade den 28.4.2004 att inte göra invändningar mot den anmälda koncentrationen ovan och att förklara den förenlig med den gemensamma marknaden. Beslutet grundar sig på artikel 6.1 b i rådets förordning (EEG) nr 4064/89. Beslutet i sin helhet finns endast på engelska och kommer att offentliggöras efter det att alla eventuella affärshemligheter har tagits bort. Det kommer att finnas tillgängligt

----
<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

    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection
with the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of The Enstar Group, Inc. (the
"Corporation") for the year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation, certifies 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 Corporation.

              /s/ Cheryl D. Davis
---------------------------------------------------
Cheryl D. Davis
Chief Financial Officer, Vice President of Corporate
Taxes, and Secretary
(Principal Financial Officer)
September 19, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to The Enstar Group, Inc. and will be retained by The Enstar Group,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
SAT Report

PMN Number: P-11-0330

SAT Date: 4/26/2011

Print Date: 8/3/2012

Related cases:

Health related cases: 

Ecotox related cases: 

Concern levels:

Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments

Level of Concern: 1-2 2

 Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments

1 11

Exposure Based Review:

Health: Yes Exposure based testing (health): May Fit HPV Category

Ecotox: Yes

Routes of exposure: Health: Dermal Drinking Water Inhalation 

Ecotox: All releases to water

Fate: ;

P2Rec Comments:

Comment: No Comment

Keywords:

 Keywords: 

SOLV IRR-E,S,L,GI

SOLV NEURO

SENS-S,L

IMMUNO

MUTA

UNCERT ONCO

AQUATOX-A,C

Summary of Assessment:

 Fate:
Fate Summary: P-11-0330

FATE: Estimations for typical MW 92 

Liquid with MP = -94.9 C (M for typical)

log Kow = 2.73 (M for typical) 

S = 526 mg/L at 25 C (M for typical)

VP = 28.4 torr at 25 C (M for typical)

BP = 80-162 C (M for mixture), 111 °C (M for typical)

H = 6.64E-3 (E)

log Koc = 2.37 (E)

log Fish BCF = 1.47 (E)

log Fish BAF = 1.58 (E) 

POTW removal (%) = 75-90 via sorption, stripping and biodeg

Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = wk

Sorption to soils/sediments = moderate

Volatilization half-life from a standard river = 1 hrs

Volatilization half-life from a standard lake = 4 da

Atmospheric Oxidation Half-life = 25 hr via OH radical

PBT Potential: P1B1

*CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = moderate

 Health:

 Health Summary: Absorption is good all routes, based on physical/chemical 

properties. There are concerns for solvent irritation and solvent neurotoxicity. There is also 

concern for dermal and respiratory sensitization, based on information in the PMN MSDS. 

There are also concerns for immunotoxicity and mutagenicity based on 

 There is also uncertain concern for oncogenicity based on 

 Ecotox:

Test Organism Test 

Type

Test End 

Point

Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 24

daphnid 48-h LC50 15

green algal 96-h EC50 8.7

fish _ chronic value 2.6

daphnid _ chronic 

value

1.8

algal _ chronic 

value

3.6

Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50 _

Sewage Sludge _ Chronic 

Value

_

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for neutral organic chemicals; 

SAR chemical class = hydrocarbon; MW 92; log Kow = 2.54 (EPI), 2.73 (M, ); liquid 
with unknown mp (P); S = 530 mg/L at 25 C (P); pH7; effective concentrations based on 100% 

active ingredients and mean measured concentrations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and 

TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments

Assessment Factor 10

Concentration of Concern 

(ppb)

180

SARs neutral organic chemicals

SAR Class hydrocarbon new chemicals category: neutral 

organics

Ecotox Category 

Ecotox Factors Comments: 

 SAT Chair: J. Kwiat
Editorial Note on Part 20
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 20 appear at 57 FR 31451, July 16, 1992.

§ 20.82 Cooperation with other DOL agencies and Federal agencies. ( a ) Appropriate use should be made of the cooperative efforts of other DOL and Federal agencies in effecting collection by salary offset. Generally, paying agencies should comply with requests from other agencies to initiate salary offset to collect debts owed to the United States, unless the creditor agency has not complied with applicable regulations or the request would otherwise be contrary to law.
( b ) Unless otherwise prohibited by law, a DOL agency may request that the current pay account of a debtor in another DOL or Federal agency be administratively offset in order to collect debts owed the creditor DOL agency by the debtor. In requesting a salary offset, the creditor DOL agency must provide the paying DOL agency or other paying Federal agency with written certification stating: ( 1 ) That the debtor owes the creditor agency a debt (including the basis and amount of the debt);
( 2 ) The date on which payment was due;
( 3 ) The date on which the Government's right to collect the debt first accrued; and
( 4 ) Where the paying agency is another federal agency, that the creditor agency's regulations under 5 U.S.C. 5514 have been approved by the Office of Personnel Management, and that the creditor agency has followed such regulations to the best of its information and belief.
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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 accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Marshall
Holdings International, Inc. for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2006, I,
Richard A. Bailey, Chief Executive Officer of Marshall Holdings International,
Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, that:





1.           Such
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2006, 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year
ending December 31, 2006, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Marshall Holdings
International, Inc.





Dated:
April 16, 2008.





/s/  Richard A.
      BaileyRichard A. Bailey,
      Chief Executive Officer ofMarshall
      Holdings International, Inc.