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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        6-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                      JAN-1-2000              JAN-1-2000
<PERIOD-END>                       JUN-30-2000             DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                     264                   1,226
<SECURITIES>                                 0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                           36,734                  31,462
<ALLOWANCES>                           (1,012)                   (935)
<INVENTORY>                                  0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        43,286                  38,324
<PP&E>                                   9,024                   7,307
<DEPRECIATION>                         (3,184)                 (1,671)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         109,935                  96,842
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   21,135                  16,100
<BONDS>                                      0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                  0                       0
<COMMON>                                   161                     161
<OTHER-SE>                              51,400                  50,295
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           109,935                  96,842
<SALES>                                 63,972                 106,743
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        63,972                 106,743
<CGS>                                   37,783                  65,087
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           37,783                  65,087
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        22,641                  34,215
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       1,610                     702
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          1,938                   6,739
<INCOME-TAX>                               833                   2,729
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      1,105                   4,010
<DISCONTINUED>                               0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0                       0
<CHANGES>                                    0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                             1,105                   4,010
<EPS-BASIC>                               0.07                    0.25
<EPS-DILUTED>                             0.07                    0.24


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATION**          I, Wayne W. Byers, certify that:          1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of ebank Financial Services, Inc.;          2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;          3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented inthis report;          4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:          a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;          b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and          c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter(the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting;          5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’sauditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):          a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small businessissuer’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 asignificant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: May 15, 2006         By:       /s/ Wayne W. Byers    Wayne W. Byers, Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Financial Condition and the Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Earnings filed as part of the Form 10Q and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-27-1996
<CASH>                                          22,708
<SECURITIES>                                     9,007
<RECEIVABLES>                                  176,087
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,060)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               219,447
<PP&E>                                          19,682
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 356,598
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           99,851
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       107,242
<OTHER-SE>                                      24,627
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   356,598
<SALES>                                        486,299
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               486,299
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  148,101
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               306,661
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,990
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 28,245
<INCOME-TAX>                                    11,606
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             16,639
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    16,639
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .78
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .78
        

</TABLE>
Before the First Division,

November 27, 1961

No. 66228.

#### Artiflor Mfg. Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/26619, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of glass balls similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Joseph Markovits, Inc.*v. *United. States*(45 Cust. Ct. 151, C.D. 2216), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 771 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 771

 Honoring and recognizing the 40th anniversary of Cheyney University's 
    historic, momentous, and epic 1978 NCAA Division II Basketball 
                           Championship win.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 13, 2018

  Mr. Evans (for himself and Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania) submitted the 
following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education 
                           and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Honoring and recognizing the 40th anniversary of Cheyney University's 
    historic, momentous, and epic 1978 NCAA Division II Basketball 
                           Championship win.

Whereas, since it was founded in 1837, Cheyney University has been a true 
        treasure in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania;
Whereas the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is the proud home of Cheyney 
        University, the Nation's first historically Black college and university 
        (HBCU);
Whereas, on March 18, 2018, Cheyney University will celebrate the 40th 
        anniversary of its notable NCAA Division II Basketball Championship win;
Whereas the Cheyney State College Wolves basketball team made history in 1978 
        when they defeated the team from the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay 
        with a score of 47-40 in Springfield, Missouri, bringing home the 
        school's first national championship victory;
Whereas just as the victorious 2018 Super Bowl Champions Philadelphia Eagles 
        defied all the odds to prove that underdogs can and will be victorious, 
        so too did the number-4-ranked Cheyney State College Wolves by defeating 
        the number-1-ranked University of Wisconsin-Green Bay team in the 1978 
        NCAA Division II Basketball Championship game;
Whereas Coach John Chaney was the NCAA Division II Coach of the Year; and
Whereas we extend congratulations to the entire 1978 Cheyney Wolves team, which 
        included John Butts, Duane Coleman, All-American Milt Colston, 
        Tournament MVP Andrew Fields, Kenny Hinson, Jeffrey Hutcherson, Roger 
        Leysath, Gerald Mills, Charles Murphy, Gilbert Saunders, Arthur Stone, 
        and John Walter--under the leadership of legendary Naismith Hall of Fame 
        Coach John Chaney: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives proudly celebrates and 
recognizes Cheyney University on the 40th anniversary of their historic 
1978 NCAA Division II championship win.
                                 <all>
```
#### Free *v.*White, Appellant.

*Negligence*— Automobiles—Collision—Case *for jury.*

In an action of trespass, to recover damages resulting from a collision of two automobiles at a street intersection, the case is for the jury and a verdict for the plaintiff will be sustained, where the evidence established that the plaintiff, with due caution, approached the crossing and was struck by the defendant’s machine driven at a high rate of speed.

Argued March 14, 1924.

Appeal, No. 11, March T., 1924, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Dauphin Co., June T., 1922, No. 736, on verdict for plaintiff, in the case of Samuel M. Free v. Joseph K. White.

Before Or-lady, P. J., Porter, Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn and Gawthrop, JJ.

Affirmed.

Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Fox, J.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.

Yerdict for plaintiff in the sum of $916.80 and judgment thereon. Defendant appealed.

*Errors assigned*was the charge of the court and refusal of defendant’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto.

*Charles L. BaileyJr.,*for appellant.

*Horace A. Segelbaum,*for appellee.

May 5, 1924:

Per Curiam,

Appellee has judgment on a verdict for damages resulting from a right-angle collision by two automobiles, one of which he was driving. Appellant here presents a single complaint — that plaintiff’s contributory negli*192gence should have been determined by the judge and not by the jury.

Wiconisco Street enters (-without crossing) Front Street in Harrisburg. On a July afternoon, during a rain, plaintiff drove from Wiconisco Street into Front Street at “hardly two miles an hour”; he said, “I looked down Front Street and I looked up Front Street and at the same time I dropped out [i. e., entered Front Street] and saw nobody coming, and before I could get six feet, before my wheels turned down Front Street, I was hit with great force on the side right where I sat......” He also said he “continued looking after the first time.” There was evidence that defendant’s chauffeur approached “at an awful rate of speed.” There was a difference in the evidence as to the extent of the view which plaintiff had down Front Street in the direction from which defendant’s car came. In such circumstances, the duty of finding the fact was with the jury, for reasons frequently stated in the decisions, among them, Brown v. Chambers, 65 Pa. Superior Ct. 373, 375; Fow v. Express Co., 68 Pa. Superior Ct. 345, 346; Simon v. Lit Brothers, 264 Pa. 121; Weber v. Greenebaum, 270 Pa. 382; Black v. Mark, 273 Pa. 138.

Judgment affirmed.
#### [Protective Life and Annuity Insurance Company Letterhead]

## Exhibit 99(b)

#### 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 Protective Life Corporation (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Wayne E. Stuenkel,
President of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

| | (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/Wayne E. Stuenkel
Wayne E. Stuenkel
President
November 14, 2002

This  certification  accompanies  the Report  pursuant to §906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent
required by the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the Company for  purposes of § 18 of the  Securities  Exchange Act of
1934, as amended.
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



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Bayou City Exploration,
Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Stephen C. Larkin, Chief Financial Officer 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 to the best of my knowledge:



| | 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 results of operations
of the Company
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Stephen C. Larkin

Stephen C. Larkin

Chief Financial Officer



August 14, 2012





This certification accompanies the Report
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of § 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



A signed original of this certification
has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
#### Ward *vs.*The County of Appling.

A county cannot be made liable by suit for fees for advertising in a newspaper the sale of lands levied upon by the sheriff under executions for State and county taxes.

(a) The plaintiff was not bound to publish the advertisements without payment of his fees, and had the right to demand them in advance.

July 11, 1888.

Counties. Advertising fees. Before Judge Atkinson, Appling superior court. March term, 1887.

Reported in the decision,

T, A. Parker, by brief, for plaintiff.

G. J. Holton & Son, by brief, for defendant,

Blandford, Justice.

Ward sued the county of Appling for a sum alleged to be due him for advertising in his newspaper the sale of certain lands levied upon by the sheriff of that county-for State and county taxes. The court below, on demurrer, held that the county was not liable.

We think the court was right in so holding. There is no provision in the constitution of this State under which counties can be made liable for a debt of this character. The county is no more liable for these advertising fees than is the State itself; and it is conceded that the plaintiff could not sue the State. He was not bound to publish the advertisements without payment of his fees, and he was entitled to demand them in advance. It has been the custom, we believe, where property has been levied upon and advertised for sale under an execution for taxes due the State, to retain from the proceeds of the sale, where sufficient, the fees for advertising; and where a sufficient amount is not raised from the sale of the property, to ap*673ply to the State for payment of these costs; and appropriations have been made by the legislature for that purpose. But the plaintiff cannot get his money by an action against the county.

Judgment affirmed.
No. 52141.

protests 867317-G, etc. (New York).

#### Wimelbacher & Rice *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following *United States v. Julius Kayser & Co.*(33 C. C. P. A. 179, C. A. D. 333) the cotton gloves were held dutiable at 50 percent under paragraph 915 as “made of fabric knit on other than a warp-knitting machine,” and the knit cotton fabric was held dutiable at 35 percent uhder paragraph 914 as “made on other than a warp-knitting machine,” plus 10 cents per pound additional duty under paragraph 924 in both instances.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

GLORIA DOUGHERTY & : CIVIL ACTION

WILLIAM DOUGHERTY :

 :

v. :

 :

PUBLISHER'S CLEARING HOUSE :

 :

v. :

 :

METRO MARKETING, INC. : NO. 02-4090

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of August, 2002, upon

consideration of the Motion of defendant Publishers Clearing

House to Dismiss (Doc. #2), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED said Motion is

DENIED for lack of jurisdiction in this matter, without prejudice

to present any appropriate motion to the state court upon remand.

BY THE COURT:

___________________

JAY C. WALDMAN, J.

Case 2:02-cv-04090-JW Document 8 Filed 08/15/2002 Page 1 of 1
No. 60663.

#### Compass Instrument & Optical Co. *v.*United States,

protests 264436-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the issues are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *John P. Herber & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 193, C. D. 1519), the protests were dismissed, and the matters were remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for determination of the value of the merchandise in the manner provided by law (28 U. S. C. § 2636 (d)).
Report

Submitted to the

United States Congress

by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Twenty-fourth Report to Congress on Progress Made in

Licensing and Constructing the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline

August 2017
- 2 -

Twenty-fourth Report to Congress on the Alaska Pipeline

I. Executive Summary

The Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission (Commission) submits this report 

pursuant to section 1810 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005).

1 Section 1810 

of EPAct 2005 requires that the Commission submit to Congress semi-annual reports 

describing the progress made in licensing and constructing an Alaska natural gas pipeline 

and any impediments thereto.

This report provides an update from the Commission’s Twenty-third Report, 

submitted in February 2017. That report highlighted the termination of Docket No. 

PF09-11-000 by TransCanada Alaska Company, LLC (TC Alaska) and the Office of the 

Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects.

II. Status Report

As stated in the previous report, at TC Alaska’s request, the Commission

terminated the prefile review process for the Alaska Pipeline Project in Docket No. PF09-

11-000. The Commission staff has no progress to report.

 1 P.L. 109-58, 119 Stat. 594 (2005), 42 U.S.C § 15801 et seq.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

We consent to the incorporation by reference inthe Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-129168) pertaining to the 2005 Performance Incentive Plan of NCI, Inc. of our reports dated February 28, 2007, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of NCI, Inc.,NCI, Inc.’s management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of NCI, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the yearended December 31, 2006. 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

McLean ,VA 

March 7, 2007
No. 49912.

#### Protest 848621-G of Shun On & Co. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The merchandise was classified and claimed dutiable at the same rates and under the same paragraphs as similar merchandise covered by *Quong Yuen Shing Co.*v. *United States*(31 C. C. P. A. 43, C. A. D. 2471. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of said cited case the merchandise at bar was found to contain salt and therefore excluded from paragraph 5. The protest was sustained to this extent.
Before the Second Division,

March 25, 1968

No. P68/168.

protests 66/9159, etc. (New York).

#### Daher Company, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Rao, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of containers of tinplate, not plated with platinum, gold, or silver, and not containing electrical heating elements, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Fabius & Co., Inc.,*and *Daher Company, Inc.*v. *United States*(55 Cust. Ct. 305, C.D. 2595), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.