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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000101295
<NAME> UNITED-GUARDIAN, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         827,622
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,002,339
<ALLOWANCES>                                    24,625
<INVENTORY>                                  1,434,919
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,600,737
<PP&E>                                       4,218,187
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,716,842
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,975,506
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          683,471
<BONDS>                                         96,667
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       486,289
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,677,461
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,975,506
<SALES>                                      4,452,665
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,452,665
<CGS>                                        2,728,722
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,728,722
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,356
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                711,440
<INCOME-TAX>                                   270,330
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            441,110
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   441,110
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32
 
 Certification Pursuant to Section 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 
 Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Canal Capital Corporation and Subsidiaries, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify that:
 
 The Quarterly Report of Form 10-Q for the six months ended January 31, 2010 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 Date: March 9, 2010
/S/ Michael E. SchultzChief Executive OfficerDate: March 9, 2010
/S/ Reginald SchauderChief Financial Officer
# C_2016078EN.01000501.xml

| 29.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/5

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the cour d’appel de Versailles (France) lodged on 14 December 2015 — Électricité Réseau Distribution France SA (ERDF) v Axa Corporate Solutions SA and Ombrière Le Bosc SAS

(Case C-669/15)

(2016/C 078/06)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Versailles

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Électricité Réseau Distribution France SA (ERDF)

Appellant:

Respondents: Axa Corporate Solutions SA and Ombrière Le Bosc SAS

Respondents:

Question referred

Question referred

Are the Orders of 10 July 2006 and 12 January 2010, adopted pursuant to Decree 2000-1196 of 6 December 2000 and Decree 2001-410 of 10 May 2001, which were themselves adopted pursuant to Law 2000-108 of 10 February 2000, contrary to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (formerly Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty establishing the European Community) in so far as they may constitute State aid which, since it was not notified to the Commission beforehand in accordance with Article 108(3) of that Treaty, would affect the legality of those orders?

---
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 11, 2023

No. 04-22-00831-CR

Miguel Angel COVARRUBIAS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2022CR10931

Honorable Frank J. Castro, Judge Presiding

ORDER

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED FOR 

WANT OF JURISDICTION. 

It is so ORDERED on January 11, 2023.

_____________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 11th day of January, 2023.

_____________________________

Michael A. Cruz, Clerk of Court
May 14, 1971

No. 71-23

#### Harry A. Davis, PVT, U. S. Army v United States Army Court of Military Review.

ORDERED:

That said Petition be, and the same is, hereby denied.

(J. DARDEN would dismiss the Petition.)
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v STEPHEN F. BRUNS, Private, U. S. Army, Appellant

19 USCMA 501, 42 CMR 103

No. 22,906

June 19, 1970

*Colonel Daniel T. Ghent, Captain Bernard J. Casey,*and *Captain Robert B. Harrison, III,*were on the pleadings for Appellant, Accused.

*Colonel David T. Bryant, Major Edwin P. Wasinger, Captain William R. Steinmetz,*and *Captain Benjamin G. Porter*were on the pleadings for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

Darden, Judge:

For the reasons stated in United States v Johnson, 19 USCMA 464, 42 CMR 66 (1970), use of a record of Article 15 punishment in the post-finding portion of appellant’s trial was erroneous. The error was not prejudicial, however. Bruns testified in mitigation and explained the reasons for his misconduct — twice failing to go to his appointed place of duty and two brief unauthorized absences. Because of the appellant’s candor and apparent honesty the military judge recommended suspension of both the punitive discharge and the confinement period. The convening authority later acted fávorably on the military judge’s recommendation. Consequently, any harm arising from the admission of such evidence appears to have been neutralized.

This case also has an issue regarding the military judge’s inquiry' into the appellant’s decision to be tried by a mil*502itary judge alone. The record reflects that Burns signed a request to be tried in this way and that at trial the military judge inquired about the appellant’s choice. At that time the military judge showed the request to the appellant, who, in response to the former’s questioning, acknowledged that he had signed the document, that he had talked with trial defense counsel at length about it, that he was aware he had a right to be tried by a panel of officers and of his right to have one-third of the membership composed of enlisted men, that he had no questions about his rights, that he was waiving trial by jury, and that he still wished to be tried by the military judge alone.

We are satisfied that the results of this inquiry reflect an informed, voluntary choice by the appellant for trial by a military judge.

The decision of the Court of Military Review is therefore affirmed.

Chief Judge Quinn concurs.

Ferguson, Judge

(concurring in part and dissenting in part) :

I concur in part and dissent in part.

I agree with my brothers that this record reflects an informed, voluntary choice by the appellant for trial by a military judge alone. However, I disagree with their holding that the accused was not harmed by the use of a record of Article 15 punishment in the post-finding portion of the trial for the reasons set forth in my separate opinion in United States v Johnson, 19 USCMA 464, 42 CMR 66 (1970).
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 14, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 48494]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19934]

========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

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


Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 14, 2012 / 
Notices

[[Page 48494]]

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Research Service

Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive License

AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, intends to grant to North 
Carolina State University of Raleigh, North Carolina, an exclusive 
license to the variety of soybean described in Plant Variety Protection 
Application Number 201200307, ``NC-MILLER'', filed on May 31, 2012.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 13, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to: USDA, ARS, Office of Technology Transfer, 
5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Rm. 4-1174, Beltsville, Maryland 20705-5131.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: June Blalock of the Office of 
Technology Transfer at the Beltsville address given above; telephone: 
301-504-5989.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Government's rights in this 
plant variety are assigned to the United States of America, as 
represented by the Secretary of Agriculture. The prospective exclusive 
license will be royalty-bearing and will comply with the terms and 
conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive 
license may be granted unless, within thirty (30) days from the date of 
this published Notice, the Agricultural Research Service receives 
written evidence and argument which establishes that the grant of the 
license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 
and 37 CFR 404.7.

Richard J. Brenner,
Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-19934 Filed 8-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-03-P
```
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 83 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 83

   Commemorating the 65th Anniversary of the Black Press of America.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 16, 2005

 Mr. Santorum (for himself, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Martinez, 
Mr. Levin, and Mr. Lugar) submitted the following resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Commemorating the 65th Anniversary of the Black Press of America.

Whereas on February 29, 1940, the Black Press of America gathered for the first 
        time in Chicago, Illinois;
Whereas the Black Press of America joins together over 200 African-American 
        community newspapers from across the United States;
Whereas the African-American press has profoundly influenced the fight for the 
        rights of African-Americans;
Whereas African-American newspapers articulated the ideals of freedom and 
        equality during those times in the history of the United States when the 
        country failed to honor its commitment to the founding principles of the 
        Nation;
Whereas the African-American press has fostered pride, solidarity, and self-
        reliance within the African-American community;
Whereas the African-American press has had a profound influence on the rise of 
        opinion, leadership, and group action among African-Americans;
Whereas the African-American press has operated as an instrument of social 
        change for decades as it has protested inequality and spotlighted the 
        achievements of African-Americans;
Whereas African-American newspapers continue to broaden the social discourse 
        surrounding the struggle of today's African-Americans for equal 
        opportunity; and
Whereas commemorating the Black Press of America acknowledges the significant 
        role all African-American newspapers have played in the history of the 
        United States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate commemorates the 65th Anniversary of the 
Black Press of America by recognizing--
            (1) the significant contributions all African-American 
        newspapers have made from the time of slavery and segregation 
        to today; and
            (2) the continued contributions African-American newspapers 
        make to the ideal of equal opportunity for all Americans.
                                 <all>
```
H. Con. Res. 193 Agreed to October 16, 2007 

One Hundred Tenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the fourth day of January, two thousand and seven 

Concurrent Resolution 

Whereas in 2006 there were over 16,000,000 hunters in the United 

States of which only .0013 percent incurred an injury during 

the past hunting season; 

Whereas in 2006 this injury rate was lower than many other 

forms of recreation; 

Whereas there are 70,000 hunter education instructors teaching 

hunter safety, ethics, and conservation to approximately 750,000 

students successfully each year; 

Whereas State fish and game agencies began offering hunter safety 

programs in 1949, and since then, more than 35,000,000 people 

have been certified; 

Whereas much of the success of hunter safety can be contributed 

to hunter education training and the role of responsible hunters 

in the field; 

Whereas Congress commends Pennsylvania hunters for setting a 

new State safety record in 2006; 

Whereas hunters continue year after year to improve their safety 

record; and 

Whereas hunters are the vital link in preserving and maintaining 

the great natural resources in the United States, including wild 

places: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That the Congress— 

(1) recognizes all hunters across the United States for 

their continued commitment to safety; and 

(2) directs the Secretary of the Senate to transmit a copy 

of this resolution to the Pennsylvania State Game Commissioner and the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate.
#### Charles Happel, Inc., a/c Steinway & Sons, et al. *v.*United States

No. 6741.

Entry No. 704181, etc.

Invoices dated London, England, May 29, 1941, etc.

Certified June 14, 1941, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., July 19, 1941, etc.

(Decided January 10, 1947)

*Strauss & Hedges (Hadley S. King*of counsel) for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

(Stipulation omitted.)

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importers on entry because of advances by .the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
# C_2016211EN.01005001.xml

| 13.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/50

---

Judgment of the General Court of 27 April 2016 — Niagara Bottling v EUIPO (NIAGARA)

(Case T-89/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark NIAGARA - Absolute grounds for refusal - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 211/63)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Niagara Bottling LLC (Ontario, United States) (represented by: M. Edenborough QC)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: A. Jakab, A. Schifko and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 December 2014 (Case R 784/2014-5), concerning the international registration designating the European Union of the word mark NIAGARA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Niagara Bottling LLC to bear the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Niagara Bottling LLC to bear the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 118, 13.4.2015.

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Coast Guard 

          - 33 CFR Part 165 
          - [CGD05-07-038] 
          - RIN 1625-AA00 

# AGENCY:

Coast Guard, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Temporary final rule; correction. 

# SUMMARY:

                        The U. S. Coast Guard published a rule in the                         **Federal Register**                         of April 23, 2007, a document concerning the Queen of England's visit to Jamestown Island, VA. Inadvertently § 165.T07-038 was numbered incorrectly. This document corrects that number.                     

# DATES:

This rule is effective from 8 a.m. on May 3, 2007, until 8 p.m. on May 4, 2007. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

LCDR Thomas Tarrants, Enforcement Branch Chief, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads, Virginia at (757) 483-8571. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The U.S. Coast Guard published a document in the                     **Federal Register**                     of April 23, 2007, (72 FR 20051) inadvertently numbering the section § 165.T07-038. This correction removes the number published on April 23, 2007.                 

In rule FR Doc. CGD05-07-038 published on April 23, 2007, (72 FR 20051) make the following correction. On page 20052, in two places, remove the number § 165.T07-038 and put in place of that number § 165.T05-038. 

Dated: April 25, 2007. 

Steve Venckus, 

Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law.

[FR Doc. E7-8315 Filed 4-30-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | 1. | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | Information                contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,                the                financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                    |                                                                                             |                                  |
|-----------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|
|                               |                                                                                        |                             |
| Date: June                12, 2007 | By:                                                                                    | /s/ Arthur                Trudel |
|                                    | Arthur                Trudel                                                                     |
|                                    | Senior                Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and                Secretary  |
# C_2015320EN.01005301.xml

| 28.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 320/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 320/53

---

Action brought on 20th July 2015 — ZZ and ZZ v CEPOL

(Case F-105/15)

(2015/C 320/73)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ and ZZ (represented by: L. Levi, A. Blot, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: CEPOL (European Police College)

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision of CEPOL by which it accepted the resignation of the two applicants as a consequence of their refusal to work at the new headquarters of the agency, in Budapest (Hungary), and claim for compensation in respect of the material and non-material damage allegedly sustained.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of CEPOL of 22 December 2014 by which CEPOL ‘accepted’ the resignation of two applicants; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of CEPOL of 22 December 2014 by which CEPOL ‘accepted’ the resignation of two applicants;

| — | so far as necessary, annul the CEPOL’s decisions dated 10 April 2015, rejecting the Applicants’ complaints lodged between 13 January and 17 February 2015, against the aforementioned decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

so far as necessary, annul the CEPOL’s decisions dated 10 April 2015, rejecting the Applicants’ complaints lodged between 13 January and 17 February 2015, against the aforementioned decision;

| — | compensate the material prejudice suffered by the Applicants; |
| --- | --- |

—

compensate the material prejudice suffered by the Applicants;

| — | compensate the moral prejudice suffered by the Applicants; |
| --- | --- |

—

compensate the moral prejudice suffered by the Applicants;

| — | order CEPOL to pay all the costs incurred by the Applicants for the present appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order CEPOL to pay all the costs incurred by the Applicants for the present appeal.

---
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:? U.S. DOT/FAA - Regulatory Evaluation Form