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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM TRISTAR
AEROSPACE AND SUBSIDIARIES FORM 10-K AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND FOR THE TWELVE
MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           8,202
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   35,551
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,072
<INVENTORY>                                     94,980
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               141,915
<PP&E>                                           5,345
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,413
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 155,758
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           27,219
<BONDS>                                         75,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           170
<OTHER-SE>                                      53,369
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   155,758
<SALES>                                        185,945
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               185,945
<CGS>                                          126,372
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,430
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,475
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 24,831
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,048
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,783
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    15,783
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.94
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.88
        

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


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-24-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-24-1999
<CASH>                                             607
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   83,288
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (4,481)
<INVENTORY>                                     36,152
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               124,445
<PP&E>                                          72,081
<DEPRECIATION>                                (28,943)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 238,572
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           57,271
<BONDS>                                        112,101
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            13
<OTHER-SE>                                      64,420
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   238,572
<SALES>                                        390,952
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               390,952
<CGS>                                          278,836
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  278,836
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                90,728
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,935
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,453
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,364
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,089
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.64



</TABLE>
Exhibit 21.1

INOVIO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

Subsidiaries



|                         |  |                             
|------------------------ |  | ----------------------------
|Subsidiary Name(1)       |  | Jurisdiction of Organization
|Genetronics, Inc.        |  | Delaware                    
|VGX Pharmaceuticals, LLC |  | Delaware                    
|VGX Animal Health, Inc   |  | Delaware                    
|Inovio Asia Pte. Ltd.    |  | Singapore                   



|(1) | In accordance with Instructions (ii) to Exhibit (21) to the Exhibit Table in Item 601 of Regulation S-K, Registrant has omitted from the above table
one of its subsidiaries because such omitted subsidiary does not constitute a significant subsidiary of registrant as of the end of the year covered by this report.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Transportation

###### Office of the Secretary 

# AGENCY:

Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Order to Show Cause (Order 2007-5-2), Docket OST-2007-27074.

# SUMMARY:

The Department of Transportation is directing all interested persons to show cause why it should not issue an order finding Lynx Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Frontier Airlines, fit, willing, and able, and awarding it a certificate of public convenience and necessity to engage in interstate scheduled air transportation of persons, property, and mail. 

# DATES:

Persons wishing to file objections should do so no later than May 18, 2007. 

# ADDRESSES:

Objections and answers to objections should be filed in Docket OST-2007-27074 and addressed to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, (M-30, Room PL-401), 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, and should be served upon the parties listed in Attachment A to the order. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vanessa R. Balgobin, Air Carrier Fitness Division (X-56, Room 6401), U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-9721. 

Dated: May 4, 2007. 

Robert S. Goldner, 

Special Counsel.

[FR Doc. E7-8997 Filed 5-9-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
(Reap. Dec. 9425)

#### The Western Auto Supply Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. 3882, etc.

(Decided May 19, 1959)

*Jolm D. Rocíe*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochrtm*Doub, Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge:

The proper value for dutiable purposes of certain bicycles covered by the appeals for a reappraisement enumerated in the schedule attached to and made part of this decision is before the court for determination.

The parties hereto have entered into a stipulation whereby it has been agreed that the market value or the price, at the time of exportation of the involved merchandise, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, was the appraised value, less the charges, as invoiced, for in*640land freight and f.o.b. charges. It was further stipulated and agreed that there was no higher foreign value for the such or similar merchandise at the time of exportation.

Upon the record before the court, I find and hold that export value, as that value is defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1402(d)), is the proper basis for determining the value of the bicycles in controversy and that said' value is represented by the appraised value, less the charges, as invoiced, for inland freight and f.o.b. charges. As to all other merchandise, the appeals are dismissed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
Exhibit 32

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

     In  connection  with the 10-QSB of  American  Utilicraft  Corporation  (the
"Company"), the undersigned officers hereby certify that the Company's quarterly
report on Form  10-QSB  for the  quarter  that  ended  September  30,  2002 (the
"Report"),  as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date
hereof,

     a)   fully complies with the  requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o (d)); and

     b)   that information  contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in
          all  material  respects,   the  financial  condition  and  results  of
          operations of the issuer



     This certificate is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not
be  deemed  to be a part  of the  Report  or  "filed"  for  any  other  purposes
whatsoever.


     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this certificate to be signed by
it Chief Financial Officer and its Principal  Accounting Officer this 9th day of
November, 2004.


 /s/ John J. Dupont                         /s/ M. Karen Shoemaker
-------------------------------------      -------------------------------------
John J. Dupont                             M. Karen Shoemaker
President and Chief Executive Officer      Principal Accounting Officer
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1242 

To provide for the treatment of certain hospitals under the Medicare program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 21 (legislative day, JUNE 16), 2011 

Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself and Mr. MANCHIN) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To provide for the treatment of certain hospitals under the 

Medicare program. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fair Competition for 

5 Hospitals Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN HOSPITALS. 

7 (a) TREATMENT.— 

8 (1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other 

9 provision of law, effective for discharges occurring 

10 on or after October 1, 2011, for purposes of making 

11 payments under section 1886(d) of the Social SecuVerDate Mar 15 2010 21:54 Jun 22, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S1242.IS S1242

srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1242 IS

1 rity Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww) to a hospital described 

2 in paragraph (2), the wage index that applies to 

3 such hospital under such section shall be the highest 

4 wage index assigned to hospitals in the core-based 

5 statistical area in which the hospital is located (re6 gardless of which State the hospital is located in) as 

7 a result of the application of section 4410(a) of the 

8 Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (42 U.S.C. 1395ww 

9 note). 

10 (2) HOSPITAL DESCRIBED.—A hospital de11 scribed in this paragraph is a hospital— 

12 (A) that is located in a core-based statis13 tical area which is comprised of counties from 

14 more than 1 State; 

15 (B) that is not located in a core-based sta16 tistical area in which 1 or more hospitals are 

17 subject to the minimum wage index under para18 graph (h)(4) of section 412.64 of title 42, Code 

19 of Federal Regulations; and 

20 (C) that is not located in a core-based sta21 tistical area in which the highest wage index de22 scribed in paragraph (1) applies to hospitals de23 scribed in such paragraph under a State reim24 bursement system under section 1814(b)(3) or 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1242 IS

1 1886(c) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

2 1395f(b)(3); 1395ww(c)). 

3 (b) RULES.—Any increase in the wage index of a hos4 pital as a result of the application of subsection (a) shall 

5 be treated as the result of a decision of the Medicare Geo6 graphic Classification Review Board under paragraph (10) 

7 of section 1886(d) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

8 1395ww(d)) and subject to budget neutrality under para9 graph (8)(D) of such section. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
No. 47643.

#### Protests 85253-K, etc., of M. Pressner & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 41823 fur cats were held dutiable at 50 percent under paragraph 1519 (e) and metal kazoos, not plated, at 45 percent under paragraph 397 on the authority of Abstracts 44122 and 32264.
No. 6247.

#### ALBERT FABACHER vs. CHARITY HOSPITAL.

Syllabus.

Although in the interpretation of contracts words may sometimes be supplied to make clear that which is not *so;*yet nothing may be added the effect of which is to change the meaning of that which is otherwise clear.

Appeal from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, Division “E,” No. 107,371. Honorable G. H. Theard, Judge.

'Cage, Baldwin, Crabites & Watkins, for plaintiff and appellant.

H. Gamble, R. C. S. Reid, for defendant and appellee.

His Honor, JOHN ST. PAUL,

rendered the opinion and decree of the Court, as follows:

The late John Saal, having a contract with the defendant to furnish it with milk, gave, during the course of the *122•contract, an order upon defendant in the following words, to-wit:

> “Please honor my order for Albert Fabacher for check of milk account and turn same over to him every month until further notice. ’ ’

Plaintiff contends that this was an assignment of all monies due and to become due said Saal under said contract; the administration of the succession of Saal claims that it was a mere mandate, or power of attorney, revocable at will, and actually revoked by the death of said Saal.

On its face the above purports to be a mere mandate. Saal, by reserving to himself the unqualified right to revoke his order, clearly retained full Control and dominion over the-fund arising from the contract with defendant.

But plaintiff shows that, at the time the above order ■was given, Saal was indebted to him in a large sum of money, and he therefore contends that under the circumstances, the terms “until further notice” are to be interpreted as meaning until payment in full of Saal’s indebtedness to Fabacher, of which due notice should be given.

It is said in his brief, page 5: We interpret the final clause “until further notice” to mean that Saal intended to pay Fabacher in full, and that after such payment he reserved the right to notify the Hospital, etc. (Black letters ours.)

But the terms “until further notice,” used .without restriction, cannot be construed in the manner contended for. To do so would be to add to them, not for the purpose of making clear that which is not so, but of giving a new and different meaning to that which by itself is per*123fectly clear; in other words to make a contract for the parties.

Opinion and decree, January 5th, 1915.

McConnel vs. City, 35 An., 273.

The district judge thought the order relied upon a mandate, .and not an assignment, and his conclusion appears to us correct.

Judgment affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

 

I, Harry E.Gruber, M.D., President and Chief Executive Officer of Kintera, Inc. (the“Registrant”), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, basedon my knowledge:

 

(1)           the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofthe Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the“Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Registrant.

 

 

Dated: May 17, 2004

 

 
| /s/ Harry E.  Gruber, M.D.             |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Harry E.  Gruber, M.D.                 |
| President  and Chief Executive Officer |
| (Principal  Executive Officer)         |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed formwithin the electronic version of this written statement required by Section906, has been provided to Kintera and will be retained by Kintera and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 on Form 10-K of Innospec
Inc. (the Company) for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ian P. Cleminson, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 and 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/    IAN P.
CLEMINSON                                              
|Ian P. Cleminson Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
|                                                                     
|February 19, 2010                                                    



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 and is not being filed as part of this Report or as a separate
disclosure document.



A signed original of this written statement
required by 18 U.S.C. §1350 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
Case No. 13,370.

#### STEPHENS & C. TRANSP. CO. v. WESTERN UNION TEL. CO.

[Nowhere reported; opinion not now accessible.]
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v WALTER R. BEST, Private E-2, U. S. Army, Appellant

8 USCMA 592, 25 CMR 96

No. 10,678

Decided January 10, 1958

*Major Frank C. Stetson*and *First Lieutenant Lawrence R. Fullem*were on the brief for Appellant, Accused.

*Lieutenant Colonel John G. Lee*and *First Lieutenant Jay D. Fischer*were on the brief for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

Homer Ferguson, Judge:

The accused’s unauthorized absence from his organization, terminated by apprehension, resulted in his subsequent conviction of desertion, in violation of Article 85, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 885. The accused pleaded guilty to the lesser included offense of absence without leave, in violation of Article 86 of the Code, supra, 10 USC § 886.

The conviction of desertion must be set aside. The instructions were similar to those in United States v Soccio, 8 USCMA 477, 24 CMR 287. The record is returned to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for reference to a board of review. The board, in its discretion, may affirm the lesser offense of absence without leave and reassess the entire sentence, or it may order a rehearing on the desertion charge.

Chief Judge Quinn concurs.

Judge Latimer dissents.
No. 43153.

#### Protest 929785-G of Albert Eckstein & Co. Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It appeared that the Baku hats were packed in paper cartons which in turn were covered with burlap. No marking was found on either the hats or the paper cartons but the burlap was marked. As the paper cartons were the immediate containers of the hats the protest was overruled on the authority of *Givaudan*v. *United States*(22 C. C. P. A. 115, T. D. 47104).