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 FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         131,379
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   49,360
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    232,131
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               656,481
<PP&E>                                       1,109,113
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,280,197
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          614,346
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       200,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,110,944
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,280,197
<SALES>                                        925,061
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               925,061
<CGS>                                          460,820
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  460,820
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,287,119
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              46,873
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (869,751)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        12
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (869,763)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (869,763)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.07)


</TABLE>
§ 2570.138 Decision of the administrative law judge. For 502(c)(7) civil penalty proceedings, this section shall apply in lieu of § 18.57 of this title. ( a ) *Proposed findings of fact, conclusions, and order.* Within twenty (20) days of the filing of the transcript of the testimony, or such additional time as the administrative law judge may allow, each party may file with the administrative law judge, subject to the judge's discretion, proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order together with a supporting brief expressing the reasons for such proposals. Such proposals and briefs shall be served on all parties, and shall refer to all portions of the record and to all authorities relied upon in support of each proposal.
( b ) *Decision of the administrative law judge.* Within a reasonable time after the time allowed for the filing of the proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order, or within thirty (30) days after receipt of an agreement containing consent findings and order disposing of the disputed matter in whole, the administrative law judge shall make his or her decision. The decision of the administrative law judge shall include findings of fact and conclusions of law with reasons therefor upon each material issue of fact or law presented on the record. The decision of the administrative law judge shall be based upon the whole record. In a contested case in which the Department and the Respondent have presented their positions to the administrative law judge pursuant to the procedures for 502(c)(7) civil penalty proceedings as set forth in this subpart, the penalty (if any) which may be included in the decision of the administrative law judge shall be limited to the penalty expressly provided for in section 502(c)(7) of ERISA. It shall be supported by reliable and probative evidence. The decision of the administrative law judge shall become final agency action within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 704 unless an appeal is made pursuant to the procedures set forth in §§ 2570.139 through 2570.141 of this subpart.
Exhibit 32.01

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of SERENA Software, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ended July 31, 2006 (the Report) for the purpose of complying with Rule
13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

I, Mark E. Woodward, Chief Executive Officer of SERENA Software, Inc. certify that, to my knowledge:



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



|(2) |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of SERENA Software, Inc.
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/s/    MARK E. WOODWARDMark E. Woodward President and Chief Executive Officer And Director


Date: September 14, 2006

This Certification is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
§ 405.1 Definitions. As used in this part the term: ( a ) *Fiscal year* means the calendar year or other period of 12 consecutive calendar months, on the basis of which financial accounts are kept by an employer. Where an employer designates a new fiscal year period prior to the expiration of a previously established fiscal year period, the resultant period of less than 12 consecutive calendar months, and thereafter the newly established fiscal year, shall in that order constitute the fiscal year for purposes of the reports required to be filed by section 203(a) of the Act and of the regulations in this part.
( b ) *Corresponding principal officers* shall include any person or persons performing or authorized to perform principal executive functions corresponding to those of president and treasurer, of any employer engaged in whole or in part in the performance of the activities described in section 203(a) of the Act.
[28 FR 14384, Dec. 27, 1963, as amended at 42 FR 59070, Nov. 15, 1977]
In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 30, 2007. 

Resolved, That the resolution from the Senate (S. Con. 

Res. 27) entitled ‘‘Concurrent resolution supporting the goals 

and ideals of ‘National Purple Heart Recognition Day’ ’’, do 

pass with the following 

AMENDMENT: 

Strike the preamble and insert the following new 

preamble: 

Whereas the Purple Heart is the oldest military decoration 

in present use; 

Whereas the Purple Heart is awarded in the name of the 

President of the United States to members of the 

Armed Forces who are wounded in action against an 

enemy of the United States or are wounded while held 

as prisoners of war, and is awarded posthumously to 

the next of kin of members of the Armed Forces who 

are killed in action against an enemy of the United 

States or who die of wounds received in action against 

an enemy of the United States; 

Whereas the Purple Heart was established on August 7, 

1782, during the Revolutionary War, when General 

George Washington issued an order establishing the 

Badge of Military Merit; 

Whereas the award of the Purple Heart ceased with the 

end of the Revolutionary War, but was revived in 

1932, the 200th anniversary of George Washington’s 
2 

•SCON 27 EAH 

birth, out of respect for his memory and military 

achievements; and 

Whereas areas observing National Purple Heart Recognition Day is a fitting tribute to George Washington 

and to the more than 1.5 million recipients of the Purple Heart: Now, therefore, be it 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 27 

AMENDMENT
### Ground-water resources of north-central Connecticut

By: Robert Vittum Cushman

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1752

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 67 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 67

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE.

    There is established a Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural 
Ceremonies (in this resolution referred to as the ``joint committee''), 
consisting of 3 Senators and 3 Members of the House of Representatives 
appointed by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House 
of Representatives, respectively. The joint committee is authorized to 
make the necessary arrangements for the inauguration of the President-
elect and the Vice President-elect of the United States.

SEC. 2. SUPPORT OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE.

    The joint committee--
            (1) is authorized to utilize appropriate equipment and the 
        services of appropriate personnel of departments and agencies 
        of the Federal Government, under arrangements between the joint 
        committee and the heads of the departments and agencies, in 
        connection with the inaugural proceedings and ceremonies; and
            (2) may accept gifts and donations of goods and services to 
        carry out its responsibilities.

            Passed the Senate February 8 (legislative day, February 6), 
      2008.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
110th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                            S. CON. RES. 67

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Establishing the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies.
```
#### LEVIS et v McGERTY

Ohio Appeals, 4th Dist, Lawrence Co

Decided March 31, 1930

.Corn & Jenkins, Ironton and James Collier, Ironton, for Levis et.

A. R. Johnson, Ironton, for McGerty.

MAUCK, J.

The plaintiff in error here complains of some errors in the admission of evidence but we find nothing substantial in this complaint.

Before argument at the instance of the defendant certain instructions were given to the effect that the defendant was not liable for the negligence of the driver of the truck unless the driver was at the time of the collision the agent of the defendant and operating ■ the truck in the *282scope of his employment. This charge was sound. The rule is thus expressed in Higbee v. Jackson, 101 Ohio St., 75, 95:

During the argument of the case the court withdrew this special charge over the defendants’ objection. The trial court in taking from the jury the quite proper instructions theretofore given was of the impression that the defenadnts had admitted in their pleading that the driver was their agent and was at the time of the collision operating within the scope' of his employment. This was an erroneous interpretation of the pleadings. The defendants had by answer admitted ownership of the truck and by cross petition had asserted the- 'agency of the driver. They nowhere by pleading or testimony admitted that the driver was within the scope of his employment when the collision occurred, and whether he was or hot was a question for the jury.-

In taking from the jury the special instructions given before argument the trial court erred to the prejudice of the defendants and for that reason the judgment must be reversed.

Middleton, PJ and Blosser, J concur.
#### WILLIAM H. DICK v DORIS DICK

Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist, Williams Co

No 180.

Decided April, 1930

Charles E. Scott, Bryan and Russell V. Maxwell for William Dick.

A. L. Gebhard, Bryan and J. Arter Weaver, Bryan, for Doris Dick.

BY THE COURT

It is sufficient to say, in answer to the claim made by William H. Dick, that as long as the order fixing the amount stands, it must be complied with, and such order can only be modified by order of court made on application therefor. The order adjudging him to be giulty of contempt and sentincing him therefor, should be affirmed.

Williams, Lloyd and Richards, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 49 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.49
                                       Agreed to October 4, 2007        

                       One Hundred Tenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
            the fourth day of January, two thousand and seven

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That when the Senate recesses or adjourns on Thursday, October 4, 2007, 
or Friday, October 5, 2007, on a motion offered pursuant to this 
concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand 
recessed or adjourned until 12 noon on Monday, October 15, 2007, or 
such other time on that day as may be specified by its Majority Leader 
or his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until the time 
of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 
whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate, after consultation with 
the Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the 
Senate to reassemble at such place and time as he may designate if, in 
his opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.
  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.

  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
#### § 2704.304 Comments by other parties.

Any party to a proceeding other than the applicant and counsel for the Secretary of Labor may file comments on an application within 30 days after it is served or on an answer within 15 days after it is served. A commenting party may not participate further in proceedings on the application unless the administrative law judge determines that the public interest requires such participation in order to permit full exploration of matters raised in the comments.
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
 
 
 I, Rahul
Sen Gupta, Chief Financial Officer of Manas Petroleum Corporation (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:
 
 (1)           the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2008
(the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 (2)           the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 Date:  August
13, 2008
 
 
 /s/ Rahul Sen
Gupta_______________________________
 Rahul Sen
Gupta
 Chief
Financial Officer, Acting Principal Accounting Officer
[Crim. No. 589.

In Bank.

February 7, 1900.]

#### THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. DAVID QUINN, Appellant.

Criminal Law—Indictment—Indorsement of Names of Witnesses— Object of Requirement.—The purpose of the requirement of the law that the names of the witnesses examined by the grand jury shall be indorsed upon the indictment, is to inform both the people and the defendant of the names of the witnesses upon whose testimony the indictment is based, and to give them both an opportunity to secure their attendance at the trial.

Id.—Use1 of Surname of Witness—Knowledge of Defendant—Harmless Irregularity.—An irregularity in indorsing the mere surname of a witness upon the indictment, without giving his Christian name, is harmless, if the defendant, immediately after the finding of the indictment, knew the particular person so named upon the indictment.

Id.—Requested Instructions Included in Charge.—When all matters material and legally sound in instructions requested by the defendant were given by the court in' its charge to the jury, it is not error to refuse such instructions.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County and from an order denying a new trial. Joseph W. Hughes, Judge.

IThe facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

J. Charles J ones, for Appellant.

Tirey L. Ford, Attorney General, and A. A. Moore, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, for Respondent.

THE COURT.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of manslaughter and also from an order denying his motion for a new trial. He insists that the names of the witnesses examined by the grand jury were not indorsed upon the indictment, the statute containing such a requirement. This contention rests upon the fact that the name of a certain witness before the grand jury, to wit, G. W. Ogden, is indorsed upon the indorsement as - Ogden. The purpose of the aforesaid requirement of the law is to inform both the people and the defendant of the names of the witnesses upon whose testimony the indictment is based, and thereby to give them both an *oppor*
      *543tunity to secure these witnesses at the trial. *(People v. Northey,*77 Cal. 629.) In the case at bar there was a noncompliance with the statute, but the irregularity was harmless, as the defendant almost immediately after the finding of the indictment knew the particular person who was named as Ogden upon the indictment. *(People v. Crowey,*56 Cal. 36.)

It is next claimed that the court committed error in refusing certain instructions offered by defendant. In this regard it is sufficient to say that all matters material and legally sound in the rejected instructions were given by the court in its charge to the jury.

For the foregoing reasons the judgment and order are affirmed.
Order entered April 30, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 13
- 01126
- CR
FRANCISCO HERNANDEZ GODINEZ, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 382nd Judicial District Court

Rockwall County, Texa s Trial Court Cause No. 2
- 12
- 592 

### O RDER The State has filed an April 25, 2014 second motion for extension of time to file its brief. Because the State did not tender a brief with the motion, the State’s second motion for extension
is DENIED

. We ORDER the State to file its brief on or before May 23, 2014 . If the State does not comply with this order, the appeal will be submitted without the State’s brief.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 2, 2017

p0424 

# Order

Clerk May 2, 2017

154259 & (81)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 154259

COA: 325977

Wayne CC: 14

- 006851

- FC

KENYAN ALFONSO BOOKER,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion to file a supplemental brief is GRANTED. The

application for leave to appeal the June 30, 2016 judgment of the Court of Appeals is

considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented

should be reviewed by this Court.
§ 37.78 Does a recipient have any special obligations in cases in which the recipient determines that it has no jurisdiction over a complaint? Yes. If a recipient determines that it does not have jurisdiction over a complaint, it must notify the complainant, in writing, immediately. This Notice of Lack of Jurisdiction must include: ( a ) A statement of the reasons for that determination, and
( b ) Notice that the complainant has a right to file a complaint with CRC within 30 days of the date on which the complainant receives the Notice.