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

<ARTICLE>  5
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         495,703
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  555,196
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,152,463
<PP&E>                                         104,336
<DEPRECIATION>                                  38,750
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,757,483
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,350,316
<BONDS>                                        485,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,476
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,023,972
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,757,483
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,597
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,149,932
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,000,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             878,179
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,287,514)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,287,514)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,287,514)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.55)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.55)
        

</TABLE>
1 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 11-1311

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Frederick Cooper, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: September 27, 2011 Filed: October 4, 2011

___________ Before LOKEN, BYE, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Frederick Cooper appeals the 480-month prison sentence the district court 1 imposed when it granted his motion to reduce his life sentence based on 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and Amendment 706 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. After considering the arguments on appeal, we concl ude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Cooper: the record reflects that the court correctly determined the amended Guidelines range , carefully considered 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and the applicable Guidelines policy st atement, and explained why it chose this-2- particular reduction. See United States v. Burrell , 622 F.3d 961, 963-64 (8th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           7,877
<SECURITIES>                                    27,072
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,863
<ALLOWANCES>                                       496
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                52,532
<PP&E>                                          40,647
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,379
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 146,692
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           29,895
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           244
<OTHER-SE>                                      84,863
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   146,692
<SALES>                                         33,810
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                33,810
<CGS>                                           23,788
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   23,788
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                33,213
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   133
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 573
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (23,897)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (23,897)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (23,897)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.02)


</TABLE>
#### Leon G. HASTINGS, Petitioner, v. CRIMINAL COURT OF RECORD OF DUVAL COUNTY, Florida, Respondent.

No. O-80.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 22, 1970.

Leon G. Hastings, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and T. Edward Austin, State’s Atty., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner’s petition for a writ of mandamus to the Circuit Court of Duval County prays for a speedy trial or that the charges be dismissed. Alternative writ was issued by this Court and response thereto made by the State Attorney of said Court which warrants this court in Quashing its Alternative Writ of Mandamus, but this Court recognizes that a defendant is entitled to a reasonably speedy trial, and therefore the Alternative Writ of Mandamus is Quashed without prejudice to the Petitioner refiling his Petition if he is not granted a trial within ninety days from the date this order becomes effective.

JOHNSON, C. J., and SPECTOR and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
#### Willard Timothy MOORE, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 71-114.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 21, 1971.

Rehearing Denied June 2, 1971.

Habeas corpus denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          26,488
<SECURITIES>                                    25,682
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,319
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,132)
<INVENTORY>                                      1,100
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                70,437
<PP&E>                                          22,590
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (9,194)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  93,499
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,893
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        86,438
<OTHER-SE>                                     (7,832)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    93,499
<SALES>                                         64,924
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                64,924
<CGS>                                            4,298
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,298
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                70,625
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   241
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   8
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,526)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,405)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,121)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,121)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.45)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.45)


</TABLE>
Aunque se 3 sienta
seguro al cruzar las ©
calles de alrededor
de su casa, no asuma
que los coches

pararan cuando cruce.

US.Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
FHWA-SA-06-07

Did You Know?
Even if you feel confident”
crossing the streets around

your home, dont assume
that cars will stop for you.
**UNITED
        STATES**
 **SECURITIES
        AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION**
 **Washington
        D. C. 20549**
 
 **FORM
        10-QSB/A**
 
 S QUARTERLY
        REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
        1934
 For
        the
        quarterly period ended March 31, 2007
 
 £ TRANSITION
        REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
        1934
 For
        the
        transition period from
 Commission
        file number 333-79405
 
 **Tactical
        Air Defense Services, Inc.**
 (Exact
        name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)
 Nevada
              **88-0455809**(State
                  or other jurisdiction of
                incorporation
                  or organization)
              (I.R.S.
                  Employer
                Identification
                  No.)
 
 **5501
        Airport Drive**
 **Denison,
        TX 75020**
 (Address
        of principal executive offices)
 
 **(903)
        786-5300**
 (Issuer's
        telephone number)
 
 Check
        whether the issuer (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section
        13
        or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter
        period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has
        been
        subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes S  No £
 
 Indicate
        by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
        12b-2 of the Exchange Act): Yes £ No S
 
 The
        number of shares of the issuer's outstanding common stock on June 13, 2007
        was 49,188,198 .
 
 Transitional
        Small Business Disclosure Format (check one): Yes £ No S
  
  The
        form
        10-QSB for the three months ended March 31, 2007, as previously filed, was
        prematurely filed without the final review of the Company's outside auditors
        and
        counsel. As such, an additional amendment (Amendment No. 2) will be filed
        to
        reflect any changes that would have been necessary to accurately reflect
        the
        filing.
 
 
 **SIGNATURES**
 
 In
        accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the registrant caused
        this
        report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
 
 **TACTICAL
                  AIR DEFENSE SERVICES,**
                **INC.**June
                  20, 2007By:
              /s/
                  Mark DanielsName:
                  Mark DanielsTitle:
                  President and Chairman (Principal
                Executive
                  and Principal Accounting
                Officer)
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 10-805 

________________________________________________________________________ 

INVESTMENT GUARANTIES 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and INDONESIA 

Signed at Washington April 13, 2010 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
 INDONESIA 

 Investment Guaranties 

 Agreement signed at Washington 

 April 13, 2010; 

 Entered into force August 5, 2010.
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 187 (Friday, September 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50561-50562]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-25564]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. OA97-703-000]

Black Hills Power and Light Company; Notice of Filing

September 22, 1997.
    Take notice that on July 31, 1997, Black Hills Power and Light 
Company tendered for filing its Open Access Transmission Tariff filing.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211

[[Page 50562]]

and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 
385.211 and 385.214). All such motions or protests should be filed on 
or before September 30, 1997. Protests will be considered by the 
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will 
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person 
wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of 
this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-25564 Filed 9-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 10(x)


October 10, 2001


Michel Farkouh
The Scotts Company
21 Chemin de la Sauvegarde
69136 Ecully France

Dear Mr. Farkouh:

Pursuant to our various discussions, we confirm that in the event of termination
of your employment contract by SCOTTS France SAS(2), for whatever reason except
for serious or intentional misconduct, you will be entitled to a severance
package equivalent to 2 years salary. The indemnity for dismissal provided for
by the collective bargaining agreement ("indemnite conventionnelle de
licenciement") will be considered to be included in said lump sum severance
payment. The severance payment will however have no incidence on your right to a
period of notice and will not be considered to include any indemnity which may
be due with respect to the notice period (indemnite de preavis").

The company also undertakes to compensate you for any net loss which you may
incur on sale of your principal residence, if you are obliged to move for
business reasons for The Scotts Company.

Sincerely,

/s/ Hadia Lefavre

Hadia Lefavre
Executive Vice President
Human Resources Worldwide
#### Albert C. WHITAKER, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

No. 4150.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Jan. 4, 1937.

Frank C. Miller, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for petitioner.

Robert H. Jackson, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Herman Oliphant, Gen. Counsel, Department of Treasury, of Washington, D. C., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Cause docketed and dismissed on motion of respondent
#### Henry MORENO, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 71-42.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 3, 1971.

Certiorari dismissed.
#### Charlie WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-774.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 3, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 23 (Tuesday, February 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5259-5260]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2749]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET


Cumulative Report on Rescissions and Deferrals

January 1, 1997.
    This report is submitted in fulfillment of the requirement of 
Section 1014(e) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act 
of 1974 (Public Law 93-344). Section 1014(e) requires a monthly report 
listing all budget authority for the current fiscal year for which, as 
of the first day of the month, a special message had been transmitted 
to Congress.
    This report gives the status, as of January 1, 1997, of seven 
deferrals contained in the first special message for FY 1997. This 
message was transmitted to Congress on December 4, 1996.

Rescissions

    As of January 1, 1997, no rescission proposals had been transmitted 
to the Congress.

Deferrals (Attachments A and B)

    As of January 1, 1997, $3,524 million in budget authority was being 
deferred from obligation. Attachment D shows the status of each 
deferral reported during FY 1997.

Information From Special Messages

    The special message containing information on the rescission 
proposals and deferrals that are covered by this cumulative report is 
printed in the editions of the Federal Register cited below:

    61 FR 66172, Monday, December 16, 1996.
Franklin D. Raines,
Director.
Attachments

                Attachment A--Status of FY 1997 Deferrals               
                        [in millions of dollars]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Budgetary
                                                               resources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deferrals proposed by the President..........................    3,544.3
Routine Executive releases through January 1, 1997 (OMB/                
 Agency releases of $20.3 million.)..........................      -20.3
Overturned by the Congress...................................  .........
                                                              ----------
      Currently before the Congress..........................    3,524.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------


BILLING CODE 3110-01-P

[[Page 5260]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04FE97.005



[FR Doc. 97-2749 Filed 2-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-C
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 197 (Friday, October 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 52985]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26962]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-541-000]


K N Interstate Gas Transmission Co.; Notice of Request for 
Partial Waiver

October 6, 1997.
    Take notice that on September 30, 1997, K N Interstate Gas 
Transmission Co. (K N Interstate), pursuant to Rule 207(a)(5) of the 
Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Commission, 18 CFR 
385.207(a)(5), tendered for filing a request for authorization to waive 
certain requirements of Section 29, Second Revised Volume No. 1-B, of K 
N Interstate's tariff.
    K N Interstate states that the purpose of the request is to provide 
a one-time reduction of an Operational Flow Order (OFO) penalty that 
was imposed on UtiliCorp Inc. (UtiliCorp), in December of 1996 and 
January of 1997.
    K N Interstate states that copies of the filing have been served 
upon mainline transportation and storage shippers and affected state 
regulatory bodies.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or 
before October 14, 1997. Protests will be considered by the Commission 
in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection 
in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-26962 Filed 10-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Emma Isabel VOWELS, Appellant, v. Jason H. FOSTER and Edward H. Cooke, Doing Business under the Assumed Name of Commercial Motor Freight Lines, Jointly and Severally, Appellees.

No. 7089.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Feb. 10, 1937.

Vandeveer & Vandeveer, of Detroit, Mich., for appellant.

Edward N. Barnard, of Detroit, Mich., for appellees.

*1021Before HICKS, SIMONS and ALLEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This cause was heard upon the transcript of the record, briefs and arguments of counsel, and tne court being ot opinion:

(1) That it was error to direct a verdict for appellees for want of diversity of citizenship of the parties because there was substantial evidence tending to show that appellant was a citizen of Indiana, and, in any event, want of federal juris-, diction requires dismissal without decision upon the merits; (2) that it was error to direct a verdict for appellees upon the ground that as a matter of law there was no negligence of appellees which proximately caused appellant’s injury because there was substantial evidence tending to show that the driver of appellees’ truck (left standing upon the highway) subjected appellant to sudden peril by placing himself as an obstruction to the oncoming car in which she was riding; (3) that it was error to direct a verdict for appellees upon the ground that the driver of the car was guilty of contributory negligence imputable to appellant as its owner under section 4648, Compiled Laws of Michigan 1929, because, even were we to assume that the statute, which in terms but imposes liability on owners of cars for their negligent operation, but does not affect existing rights of such owners as against others, brings into operation a doctrine of imputed negligence not applied in federal courts (see Commercial Electric Supply Co. v. Greschner, 59 F. (2d) 512 (C.C.A.6); Wabash Ry. Co. v. Walczkak, 49 F.(2d) 763, 765 (C.C.A.6), there was substantial evidence tending to show that the sudden appearance of the truck driver as an obstruction in the path of the car created an emergency and whether such emergency existed, and, if so, whether the driver of the car acted with due care under the circumstances, presented factual questions to- be considered and determined by the jury,

It is therefore ordered and adjudged that this case be and is reversed and remanded for a new trial.