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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
unaudited consolidated balance sheet of AT&T Corp. at September 30, 2000 and the
unaudited  consolidated  statement  of income for the  nine-month  period  ended
September  30,  2000 and is  qualified  in its  entirety  by  reference  to such
financial statements.

</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000,000

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         316
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  13,027
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1,341
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               15,452
<PP&E>                                         79,618
<DEPRECIATION>                                 31,453
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 252,352
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          51,344
<BONDS>                                        27,062
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          7,089
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       6,691
<OTHER-SE>                                     103,417
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   252,352
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               49,097
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  40,474
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               985
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2,158
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                9,916
<INCOME-TAX>                                   2,127
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            7,789
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   7,789
<EPS-BASIC>                                  1.41
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.40


</TABLE>
# Comments on: 22-1392: SOLAR ENERGY INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION v. US [OPINION], Precedential
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

________________________

No. 07-14-00233-CR 

________________________

JAAFAR ABDULLAH, APPELLANT 

 

V. 

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 

 

On Appeal from the 137th District Court 

Lubbock County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 2014-401987; Honorable John J. McClendon III, Presiding 

 

February 20, 2015 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. 

 Following an open plea of guilty, Appellant, Jaafar Abdullah, was convicted of 

aggravated robbery1 and sentenced to six years confinement. Pending before this Court 

is Appellant's Motion to Dismiss Appeal in which he represents he wishes to withdraw his 

notice of appeal. As required by Rule 42.2(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, 

 

1 TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 29.03(a) (West 2011).
2

the motion is signed by Appellant and his attorney. No decision of this Court having been 

delivered, the motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed. No motion for rehearing will 

be entertained and our mandate will issue forthwith.

Patrick A. Pirtle

 Justice

Do not publish.
#### § 109-39.101 Notice of intention to begin a study.
§ 301-74.3 What must we do to determine which conference expenditures result in the greatest advantage to the Government? To determine conference expenditures, you must: ( a ) Assure there is appropriate management oversight of the conference planning process;
( b ) Always do cost comparisons of the size, scope, and location of the proposed conference;
( c ) Determine if a Government facility is available at a cheaper rate than a commercial facility;
( d ) Consider alternatives to a conference, e.g., teleconferencing; and
( e ) Maintain written documentation of the alternatives considered and the selection rationale used.
#### § 102-75.610 Who is responsible for enforcing compliance with the terms and conditions of the transfer of the property for self-help housing or housing assistance use?

HUD is responsible for enforcing compliance with the terms and conditions of transfer. HUD is also responsible for reforming, correcting, or amending any transfer instrument; granting releases; and for taking any necessary actions for recapturing the property using the provisions of 40 U.S.C. 550(b). These actions are subject to the approval of the head of the disposal agency. HUD must notify the head of the disposal agency of its intent to take action to recapture the property. The notice must identify the property affected, describe in detail the proposed action, and state the reasons for the proposed action.
# Comments on: 20-1644: In Re STURGEON                       [OPINION], Nonprecedential
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6401

MELVIN LEE HAWKINS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

D. T. MAHON, Warden; LIEUTENANT BAKER,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge.

(CA-94-759)

Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: June 6, 1996

Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Melvin Lee Hawkins, Appellant Pro Se. Jill Theresa Bowers, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Hawkins v. Mahon, No. CA-94-759 (W.D. Va. Feb. 20, 1996). We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Carl Storck and Vicki Storck, Appellants

No. 06-13-00066-CV v.

Tres Lagos Property Owners Association, 

Inc., Appellee

Appeal from the 62nd District Court of 

Franklin County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 

10964). Opinion delivered by Justice 

Carter, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Moseley participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find there was error in the judgment of 

the court below. Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s judgment to the extent that it finds that 

the that the July 2012 board of directors’ election of the Tres Lagos Property Owners 

Association, Inc., was valid and render judgment that this election was invalid. We affirm the 

trial court’s judgment in all other respects. 

We further order that each party shall bear its own costs of appeal.

RENDERED AUGUST 8, 2014

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
#### § 128-48.305-1 Abandoned or other unclaimed property.

Proceeds from the sale of abandoned or other unclaimed property that have been placed in a special fund by a bureau for more than three years shall be deposited in the Treasury of the United States as miscellaneous receipts, or in such other bureau accounts as provided by law.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

JEAN COULTER,

Petitioner

v.

THOMAS FORREST AND DENNIS

HOERNER,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 571 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 6th day of February, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.

Justice Wecht did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
August 6, 2015

Mr. Franz Willette and Kelly Coble 

BCAeronautics, LLC

P.O. BOX 7259

Houston, TX 77248

Dear Messrs. Willette and Coble:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

§§ 45.23(b), 61.113(a)(b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.103, 91.113, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 

91.203(a)(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) and (2), 91.417(a) and (b), and part 21 of 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we cannot process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your exemption request on behalf of BCAeronautics, LLC into the public docket 

(No. FAA−2015−2236) on June 11, 2015, but we are unable to process your request any 

further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy 

enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information 

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption 

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
3
V

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 703

For the relief of Khalid Khannouchi.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 10, 1999

Mrs. KELLY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Khalid Khannouchi.

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

3 SECTION 1. WAIVER OF CERTAIN NATURALIZATION RE4 QUIREMENTS FOR KHALID KHANNOUCHI.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding his inability to

6 meet the requirements of section 319(a) of the Immigra7 tion and Nationality Act relating to residence and physical

8 presence in the United States, Khalid Khannouchi shall

9 be deemed eligible for naturalization upon the filing of the

10 appropriate application, if otherwise qualified for natu11 ralization under such Act.
2

•HR 703 IH

1 (b) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

2 FEES.—Subsection (a) shall apply only if the application

3 for naturalization is filed with appropriate fees within 2

4 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
Order filed, November 12, 2014

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 14

- 00572

- CV

____________ RICHARD ALAN HAASE , Appellant

V.
ABRAHAM, WATKINS, NI CHOLS, SORRELS AND F RIEND, LLP AND

RANDY SORRELLS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 80th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2011

- 17970



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due October 20, 2014

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the
record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Michelle Tucker , the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the date of t his order

. PER CURIAM
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 05126**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  05126\05126_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted x 05126\05126_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file x 05126\05126_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file x 05126\05126_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file x 05126\05126_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file x 05126\05126_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

05126\05126_Certification Statement.pdf Plant certification statement x 05126\Supporting Documents\05126_ BLOCK DIAGRAM.PDF Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

05126\Supporting Documents\05126_ Map.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey x 05126\Supporting Documents\05126_Follow Up Questions.doc Follow-up questions regarding survey contents. x 05126\05126_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

05126\05126_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
§ 105-64.110 When may GSA establish computer matching programs? ( a ) System managers will establish computer matching programs or agreements for sharing information with other agencies only with the consent and under the direction of the GSA Data Integrity Board that will be established when and if computer matching programs are used at GSA.
( b ) GSA will designate which positions comprise the Data Integrity Board and develop a policy that defines the roles and responsibilities of these positions.
Exhibit 31.1

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 I, Oliver R. Grace, Jr., President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of Andersen Group, Inc., certify that:

 

- I have     reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Andersen Group, Inc.;  
- Based on my knowledge,     this 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 report;  
- Based on my     knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information     included in this report, fairly present 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 report;  
- 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-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant     and have: 

a)      Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

b)      Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by the report based on suchvaluation; and 

c)      Disclosed in this report any change inthe registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control overfinancial reporting.

- The     registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our     most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to     the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's     board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)       Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and 

b)       Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financialreporting. 

|  

Date:   January 14, 2003 |
|---------------------------------------|
| /s/ Oliver R. Grace, Jr.              |
| Oliver R. Grace, Jr.                  |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |
#### § 105-55.004 Compromise, waiver, or disposition under other statutes not precluded.

Nothing in this part precludes the General Services Administration (GSA) disposition of any claim under statutes and implementing regulations other than subchapter II of chapter 37 of Title 31 of the United States Code (Claims of the United States Government) and the standards in this part. See, e.g., the Federal Medical Care Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 2651-2653, and applicable regulations, 28 CFR part 43. In such cases, the laws and regulations specifically applicable to claims collection activities of GSA generally take precedence.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE18, UNITED STATES CODE, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002**

Pursuant toSection 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, theVice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of AmericanScience & Engineering, Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certifythat to the undersigned’s knowledge:

1.                                        theCompany’s Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 (“10-Q”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.                                        theinformation contained in the Company’s 10-Q being filed fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operation of theCompany.

 
| Date: February 9, 2007 |   | /s/Kenneth J. Galaznik                |
|------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|                   |   | Kenneth J. Galaznik                   |
|                   |   | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to AmericanScience & Engineering, Inc. and will be retained by AmericanScience & Engineering, Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 

----
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03-0 8 -00 307 -CR

Ja m ar Co nr ad C ham be r s , A ppe lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF B ELL COUNTY , 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 6086 6 , HO NORAB LE MARTH A J. TRUDO , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N
J amar Conrad Chamber s s eeks to a ppeal a judgme nt of conviction for ag g rava ted robber y with a deadly wea

pon. The trial c ourt has ce rtified that: (1) this is a plea barg ain ca se and Cha mbe r s h a s n o r i g h t o f a p p e a l , a n d ( 2 ) C h a m b e r s w a i v e d t h e r i g h t o f a p p e a l
. T h e a pp e a l is dismiss ed. See Tex. R. App. P . 25.2(a) (2), ( d).

____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ________________________________ Diane M. H enson, Jus tice Be fore J ustices Patterson, Pury ear and He nson Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: Jul y

10, 2008 Do Not Publish
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MARCH 13, 2013

NO. 03-12-00411-CV

Metro Ford Truck Sales, Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Motor Vehicles, Motor Vehicle Division; Freightliner LLC, n/k/a 

Daimler Trucks North America LLC; and Sterling Truck Corporation, Appellees

DIRECT APPEAL FROM THE MOTOR VEHICLE DIVISION OF THE 

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES 

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE JONES

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the record of the agency below, and the same being 

considered, because it is the opinion of this Court that there was no error requiring reversal in the 

Motor Vehicle Division’s orders: IT IS THEREFORE considered, adjudged and ordered that 

the order dated February 17, 2012, in the agency’s Docket Nos. 95-137 and 95-967 (2012 

Metro I Order) and the order dated February 17, 2012 in the agency’s Docket No. 04-0010 LIC 

(2012 Metro V Order) are in all things affirmed. It is FURTHER ordered that the appellant pay 

all costs relating to this appeal, and that this decision be certified below for observance.
Take notice that in the above proceeding concerning Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation's new Part 284 liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage services, a technical conference will be held on Tuesday, February 15, 2000 at 10:00 am, in a room to be designated at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 20426.

All interested parties and Staff are permitted to attend.

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-1582 Filed 1-21-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
ATLANTIC INTERNATIONAL ENTERTAINMENT,LTD AND SUBSIDIARIES
STATEMENT OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                           YEARS ENDED
                                                                           DECEMBER 31,
                                                                                1998              1997
                                                                                ----              ----

<S>                                                                       <C>                <C>        
NET (LOSS) INCOME AVAILABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS                        $ (2,006,624)      $ 1,047,317
                                                                       ----------------

WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK OUTSTANDING                         10,771,563         9,452,992
                                                                       ----------------

BASIC AND DILUTED NET (LOSS) INCOME PER SHARE OF COMMON STOCK
                 Continuing Opeartions                                         $ (0.15)           $ 0.11
                 Discontinued Operations                                         (0.04)             -
                                                                       ---------------------------------
                                                                               $ (0.19)           $ 0.11
                                                                       ---------------------------------
</TABLE>
§ 102-37.265 May a SASP distribute surplus property to eligible donees of another State? Yes, you may distribute surplus property to eligible donees of another State, if you and the other SASP determine that such an arrangement will be of mutual benefit to you and the donees concerned. Where such determinations are made, an interstate distribution cooperative agreement must be prepared as prescribed in § 102-37.335 and submitted to the appropriate GSA regional office for approval. When acting under an interstate distribution cooperative agreement, you must: ( a ) Require the donee recipient to execute the distribution documents of its home SASP; and
( b ) Forward copies of executed distribution documents to the donee's home SASP.