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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
 Primary EPS represents Basic EPS under new SFAS 128.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                     YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-1999             JAN-02-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-01-1999             JAN-02-1998
<CASH>                                          41,525                  55,392
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   90,703                  86,215
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,875                   1,736
<INVENTORY>                                     62,460                  59,663
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               205,330                 213,349
<PP&E>                                         144,811                 112,439
<DEPRECIATION>                                  69,779                  50,858
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 325,392                 322,177
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           84,360                  97,527
<BONDS>                                         50,283                  52,949
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        85,397                  78,440
<OTHER-SE>                                      95,691                  84,236
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   325,392                 322,177
<SALES>                                        532,392                 527,236
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               532,392                 527,236
<CGS>                                          395,273                 389,703
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  395,273                 389,703
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                95,138                  85,090
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   138                     426
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,013                   4,945
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 40,364                  49,441
<INCOME-TAX>                                    13,320                  17,559
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             27,044                  31,882
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                 (2,062)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    27,044                  29,820
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.70                    0.81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.67                    0.75
        


</TABLE>
#### § 39.107 Where may persons obtain assistance with matters covered by this regulation?

A passenger, PVO, or any other person may obtain information, guidance, or other assistance concerning 49 CFR part 39 from then DOT Departmental Office of Civil Rights and/or DOT Office of General Counsel, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Editorial Note on Part 40
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear at 73 FR 33329, June 12, 2008.

§ 40.127 What are the MRO's functions in reviewing negative test results? As the MRO, you must do the following with respect to negative drug test results you receive from a laboratory, prior to verifying the result and releasing it to the DER: ( a ) Review Copy 2 of the CCF to determine if there are any fatal or correctable errors that may require you to initiate corrective action or to cancel the test (see §§ 40.199 and 40.203).
( b ) Review the negative laboratory test result and ensure that it is consistent with the information contained on the CCF.
( c ) Before you report a negative test result, you must have in your possession the following documents: ( 1 ) Copy 2 of the CCF, a legible copy of it, or any other CCF copy containing the employee's signature; and
( 2 ) A legible copy (fax, photocopy, image) of Copy 1 of the CCF or the electronic laboratory results report that conveys the negative laboratory test result.
( d ) If the copy of the documentation provided to you by the collector or laboratory appears unclear, you must request that the collector or laboratory send you a legible copy.
( e ) On Copy 2 of the CCF, place a check mark in the “Negative” box (Step 6), provide your name, and sign, initial, or stamp and date the verification statement.
( f ) Report the result in a confidential manner (see §§ 40.163-40.167).
( g ) Staff under your direct, personal supervision may perform the administrative functions of this section for you, but only you can cancel a test. If you cancel a laboratory-confirmed negative result, check the “Test Cancelled” box (Step 6) on Copy 2 of the CCF, make appropriate annotation in the “Remarks” line, provide your name, and sign, initial or stamp and date the verification statement. ( 1 ) On specimen results that are reviewed by your staff, you are responsible for assuring the quality of their work.
( 2 ) You are required to personally review at least 5 percent of all CCFs reviewed by your staff on a quarterly basis, including all results that required a corrective action. However, you need not review more than 500 negative results of all specimen types combined in any quarter.
( 3 ) Your review must, as a minimum, include the CCF, negative laboratory test result, any accompanying corrective documents, and the report sent to the employer. You must correct any errors that you discover. You must take action as necessary to ensure compliance by your staff with this part and document your corrective action. You must attest to the quality assurance review by initialing the CCFs that you review.
( 4 ) You must make these CCFs easily identifiable and retrievable by you for review by DOT agencies.
[65 FR 79526, Dec. 19, 2000, as amended at 66 FR 41951, Aug. 9, 2001; 88 FR 27645, May 2, 2023]
----

**EXHIBIT        32.4**

**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO § 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY        ACT OF 2002**

|   | (1) | the                  Report fully complies with the requirements of § 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                    14, 2007 | By:    | /s/                    Charles N. Eldred                |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                      |   | Charles                    N. Eldred                    |
|                                                      |   | Executive                    Vice President and         |
|                                                      |   | Chief                    Financial Officer              |
|                                                      |   | Public                    Service Company of New Mexico |
§ 553.14 Direct final rulemaking. If the Administrator, for good cause, finds that notice is unnecessary, and incorporates that finding and a brief statement of the reasons for it in the rule, a direct final rule may be issued according to the following procedures. ( a ) Rules that the Administrator judges to be non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse public comment may be published as direct final rules. These may include rules that: ( 1 ) Are non-substantive amendments, such as clarifications or corrections, to an existing rule;
( 2 ) Update existing forms or rules, such as incorporations by reference of the latest technical standards where the standards have not been changed in a complex or controversial way;
( 3 ) Affect NHTSA's internal procedures, such as filing requirements and rules governing inspection and copying of documents;
( 4 ) Are minor substantive rules or changes to existing rules on which the agency does not expect adverse comment.
( b ) The Federal Register document will state that any adverse comment must be received in writing by NHTSA within the specified time after the date of publication of the direct final rule and that, if no written adverse comment is received in that period, the rule will become effective a specified number of days (no less than 45) after the date of publication of the direct final rule. NHTSA will provide a minimum comment period of 30 days.
( c ) If no written adverse comment is received by NHTSA within the specified time after the date of publication in the Federal Register, NHTSA will publish a document in the Federal Register indicating that no adverse comment was received and confirming that the rule will become effective on the date that was indicated in the direct final rule.
( d ) If NHTSA receives any written adverse comment within the specified time after publication of the direct final rule in the Federal Register, the agency will either publish a document withdrawing the direct final rule before it becomes effective and may issue an NPRM, or proceed by any other means permitted under the Administrative Procedure Act.
( e ) An “adverse” comment, for the purpose of this subpart, means any comment that NHTSA determines is critical of any provision of the rule, suggests that the rule should not be adopted, or suggests a change that should be made in the rule. A comment suggesting that the policy or requirements of the rule should or should not also be extended to other Departmental programs outside the scope of the rule is not adverse.
[80 FR 36492, June 25, 2015, as amended at 84 FR 71733, Dec. 27, 2019; 86 FR 17296, Apr. 2, 2021]
Brig. Gen. Jones wins Moller Trophy
 By None  , U.S. Central Command
  TAMPA, Fla. (April 10, 2010) — On behalf of General William M.  Fraser III, Commander, Air  Combat Command, it is a pleasure to announce the ACC winner of  the 2009 Moller Trophy, Brigadier  General James J. Jones, while assigned to the 55th Wing, Offutt  AFB, NE.  General Jones' demonstrated outstanding leadership providing  and employing forces for Operations IRAQI and ENDURING  FREEDOM – personifies integrity, service before self and excellence.      Brigadier General Jones is now assigned to United States Central Command.
EXHIBIT 31.2 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Frank Dalene, certify that: (1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Hamptons Luxury Homes, Inc.; (2) 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; (3) 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; (4) 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 and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and c) Disclosed in the report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that has occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of the annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and (5) 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) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting. Date:  November 17, 2006 /s/ Frank Dalene Frank Dalene
The State of TexasAppellee

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 13, 2015

No. 04-15-00419-CR

William Horace WALKER,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR1349

Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The trial court’s certification in this appeal states that “this criminal case is a plea-bargain 

case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” The clerk’s record contains a written plea 

bargain, and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the 

prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant; therefore, the trial court’s certification accurately 

reflects that the criminal case is a plea-bargain case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Rule 

25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides, “The appeal must be dismissed if a 

certification that shows the defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part of the record 

under these rules.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). It is therefore ORDERED that this appeal will be 

dismissed pursuant to rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure unless appellant 

causes an amended trial court certification to be filed by August 12, 2015, showing appellant has 

the right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; see also Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State,110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no 

pet.). All other appellate deadlines are SUSPENDED pending our resolution of the certification 

issue.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 13th day of July, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
# Fight is not over: Iraqi clearances spearhead fight against Daesh in Iraq

/ Published March 29, 2019

March 28, 2019

Release # 20190328--02

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

**SOUTHWEST ASIA –** Coalition and Iraqi Security Forces conducted a coordinated air and ground operation, and several clearance operations against Daesh’s networks in northern and western Iraq from March 25 to 27, 2019.

The ISF conducted several clearance operations to find and destroy Daesh fighters. The clearances targeted Daesh command sites, bed down locations, and movement corridors. These clearances were supported with Coalition air strikes. 

“After losing all their territory, Daesh wants to rebuild its forces and resume attacks in Iraq to fulfill its territorial ambitions,” said U.K. Maj. Gen. Christopher Ghika, Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve Deputy Commander-Strategy and Information. “The recent air campaign in northern and western Iraq has damaged Daesh’s network and has delivered a powerful message; Coalition and Iraqi Forces continue to be a unified team, remaining committed to the enduring defeat of Daesh.”

United international efforts against Daesh have resulted in the liberation of Daesh-occupied territory, and the ongoing fight against the terrorists will ensure their enduring defeat and the decline of their extremist’s ideology.

#DefeatDaesh

Editor’s Note:

Weapon Strike Video is available at:
§ 577.14 Labeling for owner notification letter envelope. ( a ) *Purpose and scope* —The purpose of this section is to supply vehicle and equipment manufacturers, including manufacturers of tires and child safety seats, with the label required to be shown on the envelopes of safety recall notification letters mailed to owners pursuant to § 577.5. This label shall not be used for any purpose other than compliance with § 577.5 by any entity outside of the Department of Transportation.
( b ) *Required label information and format.* ( 1 ) The label depicted in this section must be printed on the front of the safety recall owner notification envelope. The content, format, and sequence of this label are depicted in Figure 1 of this section. A Spanish version of this label, for owners located in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or the Canal Zone, can be found in Figure 2 of this section.
( 2 ) The text “IMPORTANT SAFETY RECALL INFORMATION” must be printed in capital letters, have a minimum font size of 10 point, and be printed in white text on a red background. Also, this text must be centered horizontally and located near the top of the label. The text “Issued in Accordance With Federal Law” must have a minimum font size of 10 point, be printed in black text on a white background, and be located directly beneath the preceding text, also centered horizontally within the label.
( 3 ) The logo of the U.S. Department of Transportation must be located at the bottom, left-hand corner of the label. The logo of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration must be located at the bottom, right-hand corner of the label. Each logo should be printed in black color with a white background.
( c ) *Required label size* —The label depicted in this paragraph must be 1 inch in height and 3 inches in length.
[79 FR 43678, July 28, 2014]
-----Original Message----- 

From: ginadibari@gmail.com [mailto:ginadibari@gmail.com] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 1:05 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Gina di Bari Carlos 

731 N Naomi St 

Burbank, CA 91505
§ 583.12 Suppliers of engines and transmissions. ( a ) For each engine or transmission for which a manufacturer or allied supplier requests information, the supplier of such engine or transmission shall provide the manufacturer or allied supplier with a certificate providing the following information: ( 1 ) The name and address of the supplier;
( 2 ) A description of the engine or transmission;
( 3 ) The country of origin of the engine or transmission, determined under § 583.8;
( 4 ) A certification for the information, pursuant to § 583.13, and the date (at least giving the month and year) of the certification.
( b ) The information provided in the certificate shall be the supplier's best estimate of country of origin for the unique type of engine or transmission. If the unique type of equipment used in the engine or transmission is expected to vary with respect to price, content, and country of origin during that period, the supplier shall base its country of origin determination on expected averages for these factors.
( c ) The information and certification required by paragraph (a) of this section shall be provided by outside suppliers to the manufacturer or allied supplier no later than 45 days after receipt of the request, or the date specified by the manufacturer/allied supplier, whichever is later. (A manufacturer or allied supplier may request that the outside supplier voluntarily provide the information and certification at an earlier date.)
( d ) In the event that, during a model year, a supplier of engines or transmissions produces an engine of a new displacement or transmission of a new type or produces the same engine displacement or transmission in a different plant, the supplier shall notify the manufacturer of the origin of the new engine or transmission prior to shipment of the first engine or transmission that will be installed in a passenger motor vehicle intended for public sale.
( e ) A single certificate may cover multiple engines or transmissions. If a certificate provided in advance of the delivery of an engine or transmission becomes inaccurate because of changed circumstances, a corrected certificate shall be provided no later than the time of delivery of the engine or transmission.
( f ) For suppliers of engines and transmissions, the information and certification required by this section is in addition to that required by §§ 583.10 and 583.11.
H. Res. 256

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

October 10, 2001.

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it

shall be in order without intervention of any point of order

to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1992) to amend the

Higher Education Act of 1965 to expand the opportunities

for higher education via telecommunications. The bill shall be

considered as read for amendment. The amendment recommended by the Committee on Education and the Workforce now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted.

The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the

bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto to

final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour

of debate on the bill, as amended, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the

Committee on Education and the Workforce; (2) the further

amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules

accompanying this resolution, if offered by Representative

Mink of Hawaii or her designee, which shall be in order without intervention of any point of order, shall be considered as
2

•HRES 256 EH

read, and shall be separately debatable for one hour equally

divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent;

and (3) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.