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

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 1999 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
INCOME FOR THREE  MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           5,909
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             857
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 2,700
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    113,143
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        142,616
<ALLOWANCE>                                    (1,519)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 273,702
<DEPOSITS>                                     192,806
<SHORT-TERM>                                    10,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                394
<LONG-TERM>                                     30,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           358
<OTHER-SE>                                      40,144
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 273,702
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,872
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,883
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    66
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 4,821
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,813
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,320
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,501
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       45
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,745
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    916
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         576
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       576
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.16
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.81
<LOANS-NON>                                        624
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  1,838
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,560
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       99
<RECOVERIES>                                        13
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,519
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,329
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            190


</TABLE>
§ 116.520 Emergency evacuation plan. The owner or managing operator shall prepare an evacuation plan that must: ( a ) Identify possible casualties involving fires or flooding, including a fire in the largest capacity passenger space in each main vertical zone;
( b ) Provide procedures for evacuating all affected spaces for each casualty identified as required by paragraph (a) of this section without abandoning the vessel, including— ( 1 ) Identify readily accessible areas of refuge for the maximum number of persons allowed aboard the vessel. The capacity for an area of refuge may not exceed the number of persons specified in § 116.438(n)(2) of this part, except that one person may be permitted for each 0.28 square meters (3 square feet) of deck area; and
( 2 ) Identify at least two means of escape complying with § 114.400 from the space being evacuated; and
( c ) Include procedures to evacuate passengers from the vessel using an abandon ship plan, considering the number of passengers and the vessel's route. The abandon ship plan must identify at least one escape route from each area of refuge to each embarkation station required by § 116.510 of this part.
[CGD 85-080, 61 FR 900, Jan. 10, 1996, as amended at 62 FR 51350, Sept. 30, 1997; USCG-1998-4442, 63 FR 52191, Sept. 30, 1998]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTHS AND SIX MONTHS ENDED 6/30/00
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000             JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          70,348                  70,348
<SECURITIES>                                    38,449                  38,449
<RECEIVABLES>                                   41,685                  41,685
<ALLOWANCES>                                       909                     909
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               157,459                 157,459
<PP&E>                                          11,185                  11,185
<DEPRECIATION>                                     767                   1,208
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 226,127                 226,127
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           32,031                  32,031
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           561                     561
<OTHER-SE>                                     191,215                 191,215
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   226,127                 226,127
<SALES>                                         50,923                  89,090
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                50,923                  89,090
<CGS>                                           23,965                  42,382
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   23,965                  42,382
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                28,125                  44,816
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   909                     909
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    288                   5,036
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,346                   4,402
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,167)                   1,892
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,058)                     634
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.04)                    0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.04)                    0.01


</TABLE>
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

The undersigned, Michael Gilligan, Principal Financial Officer of DB Commodity Services LLC, the Managing Owner of PowerShares DB US
Dollar Index Bullish Fund (the Fund), a series of PowerShares DB US Dollar Index Trust, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Funds Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Fund.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |                            
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------
|Dated: June 25, 2010 |  | /s/ Michael Gilligan       
|                     |  | Michael Gilligan           
|                     |  | Principal Financial Officer
DRAFT Alliance PHEV Test Procedure Talking points for Nov 18 2013 EPA/ARB meeting

1. Industry’s goals: A level playing field for all vehicles, including PHEVs (EREVs, all types of 

blended PHEVs) must be treated the same under TP regulations

2. There is no time for large changes in Tier 3 – we recommend that the PHEV test procedure 

changes be through guidance or Dear Mfr letter since PHEV vehicle developments are outpacing 

regulations:

a. The strengthening of the AECD language/mfr attestation should be handled this way

b. “All Encompassing” emissions calculation for CD test – use the CD phases, transition 

phases and then 1st CS UDDS as defined by J1711 EOT criteria, to perform a summation 

of mass across all phases divided by total miles

i. Can use development data so would not need to run both modes at cert time

ii. As per SAE J1711 3.9, the EOT should allow 1% of fuel energy or 2% of depleted

battery energy as EOT criteria

c. Fleet average credit for AER –NMOG + NOx credit

i. This is however not in Tier 3 - If CS is worst case, mfrs should get credit for fleet 

averaging for hybrids

ii. If it is not worst case, then the results are already baked in and a mfr would not 

get credits

d. For CS testing, EPA should allow (at OEM’s option) Appendix C

If OEM’s do use Appendix C which allows fuel consumption correction for net 

battery energy change, OEM’s should not be allowed to set SOC after the 

preconditioning cycle. 

The following issue is separate from PHEV TPs

1. Inuse CREE and battery degradation should still be addressed in the Tier3 final rule: There are 

basic concerns with actually performing inuse testing on customer PHEVs (time constraints, 

wiring harness intervention, greatly increased lab test burden) and with simply assigning a 

deterioration factor without an in depth analysis of actual inuse recharge data. Therefore, the 

Alliance recommends the following for Tier 3 final rule: 

a. PHEVs should not be required to do CD testing inuse (test burden on customer vehicles, 

wiring harness intervention, time constraints)

b. Inuse CREE – It is too premature given the state of PHEV battery technology to assign a 

limit for PHEVs in inuse. We therefore request that EPA change the regulatory language 

from:

i. “For vehicles that are capable of operating on multiple fuels, except plug-in 

hybrid electric vehicles, a separate in-use standard shall be determined for each 

fuel that the vehicle is capable of operating on.”

to
ii. “For vehicles that are capable of operating on multiple fuels, and optionally for 

plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, a separate in-use standard shall be determined 

for each fuel that the vehicle is capable of operating on.”

iii. EPA and mfrs should collect inuse recharge data to be able to inform a future 

durability provision.

c. Battery degradation – it is premature to set battery degradation requirements as this 

technology is in a rapid evolution phase and may be unnecessarily constricted via such 

requirements.
§ 140.1005 Suspension and revocation. An individual is subject to proceedings under the provisions of 46 U.S.C. 7703 and 7704, and part 5 of this chapter with respect to suspension or revocation of a license, certificate, document, or credential if the individual holds a license, certificate of registry, merchant mariner document, or merchant mariner credential and: ( a ) Commits an act of misconduct, negligence or incompetence;
( b ) Uses or is addicted to a dangerous drug; or
( c ) Violates or fails to comply with this subchapter or any other law or regulation intended to promote marine safety; or
( d ) Becomes a security risk, as described in 46 U.S.C. 7703.
§ 128.130 Vital systems. ( a ) Vital systems are those systems that are vital to a vessel's survivability and safety. For the purpose of this subchapter, the following are vital systems: ( 1 ) Systems for fill, transfer, and service of fuel oil.
( 2 ) Fire-main systems.
( 3 ) Fixed gaseous fire-extinguishing systems.
( 4 ) Bilge systems.
( 5 ) Ballast systems.
( 6 ) Steering systems and steering-control systems.
( 7 ) Propulsion systems and their necessary auxiliaries and control systems.
( 8 ) Systems for transfer and control of cargo, for integral tanks or fixed independent tanks, in compliance with § 125.110 of this subchapter.
( 9 ) Ship's service and emergency electrical-generation systems and their auxiliaries vital to the vessel's survivability and safety.
( 10 ) Any other marine-engineering system identified by the cognizant OCMI as crucial to the survival of the vessel or to the protection of the personnel aboard.
( b ) For the purpose of this subchapter, a system not identified by paragraph (a) of this section is a non-vital system.
#### John T. Wheelock, *Respondent, v.*Josephine Looney, *Appellant.*

Judgment affirmed. Opinion by

Smith, P. J.
#### § 702.15 Witness fees.

A witness attending any session of the Commission shall be paid the same fees and mileage that are paid witnesses in the courts of the United States. Mileage payments must be tendered at the witness' request upon service of a subpoena issued on behalf of the Commission or any subcommittee thereof.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Ford Motor Company, et al.,

Plaintiff(s),

v. Case No. 4:14−cv−13760−TGB−MJH

Hon. Terrence G. Berg

Autel US Inc., et al.,

Defendant(s),

NOTICE OF MOTION HEARING

 You are hereby notified to appear before District Judge Terrence G. Berg at the United

States District Court, Theodore Levin U.S. Courthouse, 231 W. Lafayette Boulevard, Detroit,

Michigan. The following motion(s) are scheduled for hearing:

Motion − #110

• MOTION HEARING: March 20, 2019 at 02:00 PM

Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that this Notice was electronically filed, and the parties and/or counsel of

record were served.

By: s/A Chubb 

Case Manager

Dated: December 27, 2018

Case 4:14-cv-13760-TGB-MJH ECF No. 111 filed 12/27/18 PageID.3776 Page 1 of 1
# C_2008228EN.01001701.xml

| 5.9.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.9.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/17

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 228/10)

| Reference number of the aid | XT 79/08 |
| --- | --- |
| Member State | Italy |
| Region | Calabria |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Piani di formazione aziendali |
| Legal basis | Decreto Dirigente generale Dipartimento n. 10 Regione Calabria — n. 6837 del 3 giugno 2008 — pubblicato in data 5 giugno 2008 sul supplemento straordinario n. 1 al BURC — parte 111 — 30 maggio 2008 n. 22 — Avviso pubblico piani di formazione aziendali. POR Calabria 2000/2006, Asse HI Risorse umane (FSE). Misura 3.9 — Sviluppo della competitività delle imprese pubbliche e private con priorità alle PIMI, azione 3.9.a — Formazione. POR Calabria FSF 2007/2013, Asse I Adattabilità, Obiettivo specifico A — Sviluppare sistemi di formazione continua e sostenere l'adattabilità dei lavoratori |
| Type of measure | Individual aid |
| Budget | Overall budget: EUR 0,1 million |
| Maximum aid intensity | In conformity with Article 4(2)-(7) of the Regulation |
| Date of implementation | 9.6.2008 |
| Duration | 31.12.2008 |
| Objective | General training; Specific training |
| Economic sectors | All sectors eligible for training aid |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Regione Calabria — Dipartimento n. 10 Lavoro, Politiche della famiglia, Formazione professionale |
| Cooperazione e volontariato |
| Via Lucrezia della Valle |
| I-88100 Catanzaro |

Reference number of the aid

XT 79/08

Member State

Italy

Region

Calabria

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Piani di formazione aziendali

Legal basis

Decreto Dirigente generale Dipartimento n. 10 Regione Calabria — n. 6837 del 3 giugno 2008 — pubblicato in data 5 giugno 2008 sul supplemento straordinario n. 1 al BURC — parte 111 — 30 maggio 2008 n. 22 — Avviso pubblico piani di formazione aziendali. POR Calabria 2000/2006, Asse HI Risorse umane (FSE). Misura 3.9 — Sviluppo della competitività delle imprese pubbliche e private con priorità alle PIMI, azione 3.9.a — Formazione. POR Calabria FSF 2007/2013, Asse I Adattabilità, Obiettivo specifico A — Sviluppare sistemi di formazione continua e sostenere l'adattabilità dei lavoratori

Type of measure

Individual aid

Budget

Overall budget: EUR 0,1 million

Maximum aid intensity

In conformity with Article 4(2)-(7) of the Regulation

Date of implementation

9.6.2008

Duration

31.12.2008

Objective

General training; Specific training

Economic sectors

All sectors eligible for training aid

Name and address of the granting authority

Regione Calabria — Dipartimento n. 10 Lavoro, Politiche della famiglia, Formazione professionale

Cooperazione e volontariato

Via Lucrezia della Valle

I-88100 Catanzaro

---
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WILLIAM DARNELL COLLIER, #303214,

Petitioner,

CASE NO. 2:14-CV-13827

v. HONORABLE SEAN F. COX

RANDALL HAAS,

Respondent.

__________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER'S MOTION TO REOPEN THE CASE ON AN

AMENDED PETITION, REOPENING THE CASE, AND SETTING DEADLINES

Michigan prisoner William Darnell Collier (“Petitioner”) filed a pro se petition for a writ of

habeas corpus challenging his state criminal convictions and sentences in October, 2014. In that

petition, he raised claims concerning the denial of a mistrial motion and the effectiveness of trial and

appellate counsel. Shortly thereafter, he moved for a stay and abeyance of his case so that he could

return to the state courts to exhaust his remedies on a “Missouri v. Frye” issue (an un-communicated

plea offer). Petitioner indicated that he had not previously exhausted the issue because it was based

upon newly-discovered evidence and because counsel was ineffective. The Court granted

Petitioner’s motion, stayed the proceedings, and administratively closed the case in December, 2014.

The matter is now before the Court on Petitioner's motion to reopen the case and proceed on

an amended petition raising claims concerning an un-communicated plea offer and the effectiveness

of trial counsel, the effectiveness of appellate counsel, the validity of his sentence, and the trial

court’s delay in notifying him of the denial of his motion for relief from judgment.

2:14-cv-13827-SFC-PTM Doc # 9 Filed 10/21/16 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 186
Having reviewed the matter, the Court finds that this case should be re-opened for further

consideration. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s motion to reopen this case and

proceed on an amended petition and REOPENS this case. Respondent shall file an answer and the

relevant state court record by April 26, 2017. Petitioner shall then have until June 12, 2017 to file

any desired reply. The Court makes no determination as to the procedural or substantive merits of

Petitioner’s claims.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 21, 2016 S/ Sean F. Cox 

Sean F. Cox

U. S. District Judge

I hereby certify that on October 21, 2016, the foregoing document was served on counsel of record

via electronic means and upon William Collier via First Class mail at the address below:

William Collier 

303214 

G. ROBERT COTTON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY 

3500 N. ELM ROAD 

JACKSON, MI 49201 

S/ J. McCoy 

Case Manager 

2

2:14-cv-13827-SFC-PTM Doc # 9 Filed 10/21/16 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 187
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LUIS ORLANDO ZEL CHAN, a.k.a. Luis

Orlando El Chan; MARTHA ALICIA

OROZCO AGUILAR, a.k.a. Martha

Alicio Roscoe-Aguilar,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-73939

Agency Nos. A095-316-003

 A095-316-004

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 25, 2010** 

Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Luis Orlando Zel Chan and Martha Alicia Orozco Aguilar, natives and

citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’

(“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have

FILED

JUN 09 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-73939

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of

a motion to reopen and de novo questions of law, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d

889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying petitioners’ motion to

reopen, because the BIA considered the evidence they submitted and acted within

its broad discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant

reopening. See Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir. 2002) (The BIA’s

denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed only if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or

contrary to law.”).

To the extent petitioners contend that the BIA failed to consider some or all

of the evidence they submitted with the motion to reopen, they have not overcome

the presumption that the BIA did review the record. See Fernandez v. Gonzales,

439 F.3d 592, 603 (9th Cir. 2006).

Petitioners’ remaining contentions are unavailing.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 32.1


                           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 Annual Report of FFD Financial Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Trent
B. Troyer, the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.


/s/Trent B. Troyer
----------------------------------------
Trent B. Troyer
President and Chief Executive Officer

September 29, 2008