alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 302-17.100 May we use a relocation services provider to comply with the requirements of this part?

Yes. You may use the services of relocation companies to manage all aspects of relocation, including the RITA computation. Agencies that relocate few employees or do not have the resources to manage the complexity of relocation may find that the use of relocation companies is a practical alternative. As another alternative, agencies with infrequent requirements for relocation or with inadequate internal resources may establish an interagency agreement with one or more other agencies to pool resources to provide this service.
366P15

#### In the Matter of: T.F.L., S.D.L., and B.A.N.L.

Respondent-Mother’s PDR under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA15-144-2)

Denied
<PAGE> 1

                                                               EXHIBIT 11



Anacomp, Inc. and Subsidiaries (Debtor-In-Possession,

 Effective January 5, 1996.  See Note 3.)

<TABLE>

<CAPTION>



COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE (Unaudited)

PRIMARY



                                                     Three months ended

                                                         December 31,

(In thousands, except per share amounts)              1995        1994

                                                          (Note 3)

<S>                                                 <C>         <C>

Earnings (loss) per Common Share:



   Net income (loss) available to common

     stockholders.................................  $   513     $  (259)

                                                    =======     =======



Shares:



   Weighted average number of shares

    outstanding ..................................   46,221      45,843





   Adjustments:



     Assumed issuances under acquisition

     contingencies................................    1,462          --





Total shares .....................................   47,683      45,843

                                                    =======     =======







Earnings (loss) per common share..................  $   .01     $  (.01)

                                                    =======     =======

</TABLE>

<PAGE> 2

                                                               EXHIBIT 11



Anacomp, Inc. and Subsidiaries (Debtor-In-Possession,

 Effective January 5, 1996.  See Note 3.)

<TABLE>

<CAPTION>

COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE (Unaudited)

ASSUMING FULL DILUTION





                                                     Three months ended

                                                         December 31,

(In thousands, except per share amounts)              1995        1994

                                                          (Note 3)

<S>                                                 <C>         <C>

Earnings (loss) per Common Share:



   Net income (loss) available to common

     stockholders.................................  $   513     $  (259)

                                                    =======     =======



Shares:



   Weighted average number of shares

    outstanding ..................................   46,221      45,843





   Adjustments:



     Assumed issuances under acquisition

     contingencies................................    1,462          --





Total shares .....................................   47,683      45,843

                                                    =======     =======







Earnings (loss) per common share..................  $   .01     $  (.01)

                                                    =======     =======

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 1
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 1.743 Who may sign applications. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, applications, amendments thereto, and related statements of fact required by the Commission must be signed by the applicant, if the applicant is an individual; by one of the partners, if the applicant is a partnership; by an officer or duly authorized employee, if the applicant is a corporation; or by a member who is an officer, if the applicant is an unincorporated association. Applications, amendments, and related statements of fact filed on behalf of eligible government entities such as states and territories of the United States, their political subdivisions, the District of Columbia, and units of local government, including incorporated municipalities, must be signed by a duly elected or appointed official who is authorized to do so under the laws of the applicable jurisdiction.
( b ) Applications, amendments thereto, and related statements of fact required by the Commission may be signed by the applicant's attorney in case of the applicant's physical disability or of his absence from the United States. The attorney shall in that event separately set forth the reason why the application is not signed by the applicant. In addition, if any matter is stated on the basis of the attorney's belief only (rather than his knowledge), he shall separately set forth his reasons for believing that such statements are true.
( c ) Only the original of applications, amendments, or related statements of fact need be signed; copies may be conformed.
( d ) Applications, amendments, and related statements of fact need not be signed under oath. Willful false statements made therein, however, are punishable by fine and imprisonment, U.S. Code, Title 18, section 1001, and by appropriate administrative sanctions, including revocation of station license pursuant to section 312(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
( e ) “Signed,” as used in this section, means an original hand-written signature, except that by public notice in the Federal Register the Wireline Competition Bureau may allow signature by any symbol executed or adopted by the applicant with the intent that such symbol be a signature, including symbols formed by computer-generated electronic impulses.
[28 FR 12450, Nov. 22, 1963, as amended at 53 FR 17193, May 16, 1988; 59 FR 59503, Nov. 17, 1994; 67 FR 13223, Mar. 21, 2002]
!function(e){"function"==typeof define&&define.amd?define([],e):"object"==typeof exports?module.exports=e():window.wNumb=e()}(function(){"use strict";var e=["decimals","thousand","mark","prefix","suffix","encoder","decoder","negativeBefore","negative","edit","undo"];function t(e){return e.split("").reverse().join("")}function n(e,t){return e.substring(0,t.length)===t}function r(e,t,n){if((e[t]||e[n])&&e[t]===e[n])throw new Error(t)}function i(e){return"number"==typeof e&&isFinite(e)}function o(e,n,r,o,f,u,s,a,c,p,d,l){var h,g,v,m,w,x=l,y="",b="";return u&&(l=u(l)),!!i(l)&&(!1!==e&&0===parseFloat(l.toFixed(e))&&(l=0),l<0&&(h=!0,l=Math.abs(l)),!1!==e&&(w=e,m=(m=l).toString().split("e"),l=(+((m=(m=Math.round(+(m[0]+"e"+(m[1]?+m[1]+w:w)))).toString().split("e"))[0]+"e"+(m[1]?+m[1]-w:-w))).toFixed(w)),-1!==(l=l.toString()).indexOf(".")?(v=(g=l.split("."))[0],r&&(y=r+g[1])):v=l,n&&(v=t((v=t(v).match(/.{1,3}/g)).join(t(n)))),h&&a&&(b+=a),o&&(b+=o),h&&c&&(b+=c),b+=v,b+=y,f&&(b+=f),p&&(b=p(b,x)),b)}function f(e,t,r,o,f,u,s,a,c,p,d,l){var h,g,v="";return d&&(l=d(l)),!(!l||"string"!=typeof l)&&(a&&n(l,a)&&(l=l.replace(a,""),h=!0),o&&n(l,o)&&(l=l.replace(o,"")),c&&n(l,c)&&(l=l.replace(c,""),h=!0),f&&(g=f,l.slice(-1*g.length)===g)&&(l=l.slice(0,-1*f.length)),t&&(l=l.split(t).join("")),r&&(l=l.replace(r,".")),h&&(v+="-"),""!==(v=(v+=l).replace(/[^0-9\.\-.]/g,""))&&(v=Number(v),s&&(v=s(v)),!!i(v)&&v))}function u(t,n,r){var i,o=[];for(i=0;i<e.length;i+=1)o.push(t[e[i]]);return o.push(r),n.apply("",o)}return function t(n){if(!(this instanceof t))return new t(n);"object"==typeof n&&(n=function(t){var n,i,o,f={};for(void 0===t.suffix&&(t.suffix=t.postfix),n=0;n<e.length;n+=1)if(void 0===(o=t[i=e[n]]))"negative"!==i||f.negativeBefore?"mark"===i&&"."!==f.thousand?f[i]=".":f[i]=!1:f[i]="-";else if("decimals"===i){if(!(o>=0&&o<8))throw new Error(i);f[i]=o}else if("encoder"===i||"decoder"===i||"edit"===i||"undo"===i){if("function"!=typeof o)throw new Error(i);f[i]=o}else{if("string"!=typeof o)throw new Error(i);f[i]=o}return r(f,"mark","thousand"),r(f,"prefix","negative"),r(f,"prefix","negativeBefore"),f}(n),this.to=function(e){return u(n,o,e)},this.from=function(e){return u(n,f,e)})}});
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 15

- 00092

- CV

WILLIAM WINDSOR

, Appellant

v.

JOEYISALITTLEKID, ET AL

, Appellee

From the 378th District Court

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court No. 88611

ORDER

Appellant’s Request for Leave to Supplement Record filed on July 2, 2015 is denied.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Request denied

Order issued and filed July 9 , 2015
Exhibit 32 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly report of LipidViro Tech, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kenneth Hamik, President, Chief Executive Officer and director of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.  Date:December 20, 2007By:/s/Kenneth HamikKenneth Hamik, President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

ALEXANDER HOUSTON , JR. Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 2337

[ July 25, 2019 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Daliah H. Weiss , Judge; L.T. Case No. 50

- 2018

- CF

001653

- AXXX

- MB

.
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Benjamin Eisenberg, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed.

W ARNER , G ERBER and F ORST , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
financial  statements  for Anaren  Microwave,  Inc. filed with Form 10-Q for the
three  months  ended  September  30, 1998 and is  qualified  in its  entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          10,638,055
<SECURITIES>                                    14,301,274
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,679,189
<ALLOWANCES>                                        13,000
<INVENTORY>                                      9,627,307
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                42,528,983
<PP&E>                                          32,761,624
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (24,788,945)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  50,542,831
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,492,136
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            64,715
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,559,559
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    50,542,831
<SALES>                                         10,478,787
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,478,787
<CGS>                                            6,473,591
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,784,125
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   9,620
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,034,604
<INCOME-TAX>                                       712,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,322,604
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,322,604
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.23
        


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         2,670
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  27,048
<ALLOWANCES>                                   501
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               35,116
<PP&E>                                         1,937
<DEPRECIATION>                                 488
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 75,739
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          26,013
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    1
<COMMON>                                       137
<OTHER-SE>                                     28,808
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   75,739
<SALES>                                        145,986
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               145,986
<CGS>                                          127,227
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  140,310
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (344)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             7,973
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,953)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (646)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,307)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,307)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
#### § 105-53.110 Creation and authority.

The General Services Administration was established by section 101 of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (63 Stat. 377), effective July 1, 1949. The act consolidated and transferred to the agency a variety of real and personal property and related functions fomerly assigned to various agencies. Subsequent laws and Executive orders assigned other related functions and programs.
## 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 NO. WR-87,607-01

EX P ARTE JUSTIN MILE S SANDERS, Ap plicant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 13F 1051-102-A IN THE 102n d DIST RICT COURT

F ROM BOWIE COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisi o n s o f Ar t icle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the 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. 1 9 6 7 ). Applicant was convicted of the offense of felony murder a nd sentenc ed to imprisonment for thirty y ear s. On May 3, 2017, an order desig nating issues was signe d by the trial court. The habea s rec ord has been proper ly forwa rded to this Court b y t h e d istrict cler k pursuant to T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 5). Howeve r, the rec ord has been forwa rded wi t h o u t t h e trial court having resolved the 1
The re cord inc ludes a motion for e x tension of time that was filed w ith the district clerk 1 and sig ned by

the trial cour

t on October

24, 2015. Howeve r, this motion was not filed with thisdesig nated issues in this case . We rema nd this application to the 102nd District Court of Bo wi e County to allow the trial judge to complete an evidentiar y investiga

tion and enter finding s of fac t and conclusions of law
. This application will be held in abey ance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 9 0 d ay s o f this order
. A supplemental transcr ipt containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of t he court repor ter’s notes from any hear ing or deposition, along with the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be for war ded to this Court within 120 day s of the date of this order. A ny extensions of ti me must be re quested by

the trial cour

t and shall be obtaine d from this Court.

Filed: Nove mber 22, 2017 Do not publish

Court pursuant to T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.5.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"2021-1954: Procon Analytics, LLC v. Spireon, Inc. - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"0GK9MlsoRV\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/01-14-2022-2021-1954-procon-analytics-llc-v-spireon-inc-audio-uploaded\/\">2021-1954: Procon Analytics, LLC v. Spireon, Inc.<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/01-14-2022-2021-1954-procon-analytics-llc-v-spireon-inc-audio-uploaded\/embed\/#?secret=0GK9MlsoRV\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“2021-1954: Procon Analytics, LLC v. Spireon, Inc.” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"0GK9MlsoRV\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Oral argument audio posted: Procon Analytics, LLC v. Spireon, Inc. (mp3) Appeal Number: 2021-1954 To listen to more oral argument recordings, follow this link: Listen To Oral Arguments."}
6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2010-12-23T16:23:10-0500
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

Miyoko Sakashita Oceans Director Center for Biological Diversity 1212 Broadway, Suite 800 Oakland, CA 94612 Dear Ms. Sakashita : 

### JUL 10 

## 2015 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

I am writing to confirm that on June 30,2015, the U.S
. Environmental Protection Agency received a petition from the Center for Biological Diversity and Donn J
. Vivi ani, Ph.D
. , requesting that EPA promulgate regulations pursuant to Section 6 of the Toxic Substances Contro l Act (TSCA) to protect "public heal t h and the environment from the serious harms associated with anthropogenic em issions of carbon dioxide, including ocean acidification." The petition alternately requests that EPA "adopt a rule under section 4 of [TSCA] requiring manufac tu rers and processors responsible for the generation of carbon dioxide to undertake testing to determine tox i c ity , persistence , and other characteristi cs which affect health and the environment and are necessary to determine if there is an unreasonable risk of injury to heal th and the environment. " Your petitio n has been filed pursuant to TSCA Section 21 , which provides that wi thin 90 days after the date of filing, or September 27 , 2015, for your petit i on , th e Administrator sha ll either grant or deny the petition. Section 21 of TSCA further provides that if the Administrator grants such peti tion, then the Administrator shall promptly commence an appropriate proceeding. Section 21 of TSCA also provides that if the Administrator denies such petition, then the Adm inistrator shall publish in the Federal Register the Admin ist rato r 's reasons for such denial. If yo u have any questions relatin g to your petition or EPA's guidelines for TSCA Sec t ion 2 1 petitions, please contact Mike Mattheisen by telephone at (202) 564-3077 or by email at mattheisen.mike @ epa.gov. S incere ly,

# U)~C'~ Wendy Cleland-H amnett , Director Office of Po ll ution Preventi on and To xics
cc : Dr. Donn J. Viv i ani

Internet Address (URL) • http://www
. epa . gov Recycled/Recyclable • Pnnted w1th Vegetable 011 Based Inks on 100% Postconsvmer. Process Chlonne Free Recycled Paper