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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>            This  schedule   contains  summary   financial   information
                    extracted   from  the   Consolidated   Balance   Sheet   and
                    Consolidated Statement of Operations and is qualified in its
                    entirety by reference to such financial statements.


</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000021610
<NAME>                        Ranger Industries, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                  JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                    SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                 1
<CASH>                          13,504
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   802,160
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                824,414
<PP&E>                          0
<DEPRECIATION>                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  824,414
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           512,254
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        40,000
<OTHER-SE>                      272,160
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    824,414
<SALES>                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                0
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   452,573
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                802,167
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              8,082
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 341,512
<INCOME-TAX>                    8,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             888,512
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    333,512
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                   (.08)
        

</TABLE>
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Alvin FISHER.

No. 61686.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 5, 1978.

*554Fred S. Gahagan, Gahagan & Gahagan, Natchitoches, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ronald C. Martin, Dist. Atty., S. Michael Henry, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Alvin Fisher, was charged with two counts of simple burglary. Under a plea agreement, he pleaded guilty to two counts of theft of property valued at $100 but less than $500. After receipt of a pre-sentence report, the trial judge sentenced the defendant to two years’ imprisonment on each count, the sentences to run concurrently.

On appeal to this Court, defendant relies upon two assignments of error for reversal of his sentence.

In these assignments of error defendant alleges that: (1) the sentence he received is excessive and (2) that LSA-C.Cr.P. arts. 875 and 877 are unconstitutional because they deny him due process and an absolute right of access to pre-sentence reports.

To raise an alleged irregularity or error on appeal, the defendant must contemporaneously object to the irregularity or error and state the grounds for his objection. Absent compliance with this procedure, the irregularity or error is waived. LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 841. As the defendant in the present case failed to object either when the court ordered the presentence investigation or when the court imposed sentence, he is precluded from raising these errors on appeal. See *State*v. *Williams,*La., 322 So.2d 177 (1975).

For the reasons assigned, the conviction and sentence are affirmed.

DIXON, J., concurs.
##### 



Exhibit 32.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 on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005, of
El Paso CGP Company (the Company) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, D. Dwight Scott, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer, certify (i) that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) that the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company. /s/ D. Dwight ScottD. Dwight ScottExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer) May 12, 2005 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to El Paso
CGP Company and will be retained by El Paso CGP Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# L_2005134EN.01000801.xml

| 27.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 134/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 134/8

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 795/2005

of 26 May 2005

granting no refund for skimmed milk powder in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 582/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 31(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 582/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds of skimmed milk powder (2), provides for a permanent tender. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 582/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds of skimmed milk powder (2), provides for a permanent tender.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate not to grant any refund for the tendering period ending on 24 May 2005. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate not to grant any refund for the tendering period ending on 24 May 2005.

| (3) | The Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the permanent tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 582/2004, for the tendering period ending on 24 May 2005, no refund shall be granted for the product and destinations referred to in Article 1(1) of that Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 26 May 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 186/2004 (OJ L 29, 3.2.2004, p. 6).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 67. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2250/2004 (OJ L 381, 28.12.2004, p. 25).

2

(3)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 58. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2250/2004.

3

---
#### Wayne Gene Dea KYNE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-709.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 11, 1970.

Robert E. Jagger, Public Defender, and James L. DeMoully, Asst. Public Defender, Clearwater, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Morton J. Hanlon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.

*120PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on authority of Champlin v. State, Fla.App.1960, 122 So.2d 412.

LILES, A. C. J., and MANN and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
#### Pauline G. PEARLMAN, Appellant, v. Donald H. PEARLMAN, Appellee.

Nos. 76-1918, 76-1920.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 27, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 26, 1978.

*892Howard S. Rose, South Miami, for appellant.

Milton M. Ferrell, Miami, for appellee.

Before HAVERFIELD, HUBBART and KEHOE, JJ.

KEHOE, Judge.

These consolidated appeals arose from the entry by the trial court of an order dated September 15, 1976, which modified the custody provision of a prior final judgment dissolving the parties’ marriage by transferring primary custody of one of the four minor children of the parties from the appellant wife to the appellee husband, and denied appellant’s petition to increase her alimony benefits. Except as set forth below, we affirm the trial court’s order.

One of the points raised by appellant pertains to the portion of the order that transferred custody of one of the parties’ minor children from appellant to appellee. Appellant argues that this relief was not sought by the parties in their pleadings and the grant of such relief was made without the trial court properly taking evidence in the matter.

We have reviewed the record in this case and are impressed by the trial court’s actions in attempting to provide for the welfare of the minor child, as well as providing for the benefit of the parties. However, we have concluded that the custody issue is one which should have been raised by the pleadings with its concomitant opportunity for evidence to be presented by the parties on the matter. See, e. g., *Avery v. Avery,*314 So.2d 198 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); *Teta v. Teta,*297 So.2d 642 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); and *Keathley v. Elb,*133 So.2d 471 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961). Therefore, the order entered by the trial court is reversed to the extent that it transferred custody of one of the parties’ minor children from appellant to appellee.

We have also considered the other points raised on appeal by appellant and find them to be without merit. See, e. g., *Strate v. Strate,*328 So.2d 29 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); *Muir v. Muir,*225 So.2d 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969); *Katz v. Katz,*159 So.2d 241 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964); and *Homer v. Homer,*155 So.2d 845 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963).

Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
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




I, Joseph
Bennington, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of WECOSIGN, INC. on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended November 30,
2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K
fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of WECOSIGN, INC.





February
      28, 2010By:
            
            /s/    JOSEPH
      BENNINGTONName:
            
            Joseph
      BenningtonTitle:
            
            Chief
      Financial Officer




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to WECOSIGN, INC. and will be retained by WECOSIGN, INC. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Employment Agreement between the Company and Michael E. Mazour



 
Exhibit
10.17 
 
[WEST LOGO TO APPEAR HERE]

 

	 To:
	 	 Michael E. Mazour
	 	 
	 From:
	 	 Nancee R. Berger
	 	 
	 Date:
	 	 February 10, 2003
	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 Re:
	 	 2003 Compensation Plan
	 	 


 
Your 2003 compensation plan (“Plan Year”) for your employment as Executive Vice President for West Telemarketing Corporation Outbound (the “Company”) is as follows: 
 

	1.	 	Your base salary will be $200,000. Should you elect to voluntarily terminate your employment, you will be compensated for your services through the date of your
actual termination per your Employment Agreement. 

 

	2.	 	The rate factors used to calculate your pre-tax, pre-corporate allocation profit bonus are outlined on the schedule below. You are eligible to receive a quarterly
performance bonus based on each quarter’s pre-tax, pre-corporate allocation profit margin. The bonus will be calculated by multiplying the year-to-date pre-tax, pre-corporate allocation profit times the rate factor from the table below minus
bonuses paid year-to-date for the respective calendar year. 

 
Rate Factor 
.008 
 

	3.	 	In addition, if the Company’s pre-tax, pre-corporate allocation profit margin in each quarter is equal to or greater than the agreed upon plan, you will receive
an additional quarterly bonus of $25,000. You will be paid the amount due for the quarterly bonus within thirty (30) days after the end of the quarter. 

 

	4.	 	In addition, if West Corporation achieves 2003 net income of $.05 per share greater than its stated expected 2003 EPS, you will be eligible to receive an additional
one-time bonus of $50,000.00. You will be paid the amount due for the quarterly bonus within thirty (30) days after the end of the quarter. Your annual bonus will be paid within thirty (30) days after the financial statements for December 2003 are
prepared, but in no event will be paid later than February 28, 2004. 

 

	5.	 	All pre-tax, pre-corporate allocation profit and net income objectives are based upon the Company’s operations and will not include profit and income derived
from mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures or other non-operating income unless specifically and individually included upon completion of the transaction. 

 

	6.	 	The benefit plans, as referenced in Section 7(i), shall include insurance plans based upon eligibility pursuant to the plans. If the insurance plans do not provide
for continued participation, the continuation of benefits shall be pursuant to COBRA. In the event Employee’s benefits continue pursuant to COBRA and Employee accepts new employment during the consulting term, Employee may continue benefits
thereafter to the extent allowed under COBRA. In no event shall benefits plans include the 401K Plan or the 1996 Stock Incentive Plan. 

 

	
	 By:
	 	 /s/    MICHAEL E. MAZOUR 


	 	 	 Employee—Michael E. Mazour
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 StanCorp Financial Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Floyd F.
Chadee, Senior 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 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: November 3, 2009



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|/s/    FLOYD F. CHADEE                           
|Floyd F. Chadee                                  
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32

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 Annual Report of OBA Financial Services, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned, Charles E. Weller, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and David A. Miller, Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer, each certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to best of his 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/ Charles E. Weller                             |  |  |  | Date: September 27, 2010
|Charles E. Weller                                 |  |  |  |                         
|President and Chief Executive Officer             |  |  |  |                         
|                                                  |  | 
|/s/ David A. Miller                               |  |  |  | Date: September 27, 2010
|David A. Miller                                   |  |  |  |                         
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |  |  |  |                         

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to OBA Financial
Services, Inc. and will be retained by OBA Financial Services, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASS’N LOCAL 1416, AFL-CIO v. ARIADNE SHIPPING CO.

No. 38098.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 215 So.2d 51.
Exhibit 32.1



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 Annual Report of Shurgard Storage Centers, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-K/A), I, Charles K. Barbo, Chief Executive 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:



|(1) | Form 10-K/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
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | The information contained in the Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: October 14, 2005



|                                        
|----------------------------------------
|/s/ Charles K. Barbo                    
|Charles K. Barbo Chief Executive Officer
# October 2008 - February 2011
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE: KEVIN BOYER,

 Relator.

'

'

'

'

'

'

No. 08-14-00182-CR

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

IN MANDAMUS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Kevin Boyer, filed a prose petition for writ of mandamus in which he complains 

that Hon. Richard A. Roman, formerly sitting as Judge of the 346th District Court of El Paso 

County, denied Relator’s prose motion for post-conviction DNA testing under Texas Code of 

Criminal Procedure Chapter 64. See TEX.CODE CRIM.PROC.ANN. art. 64.01-64.05(West Supp. 

2013). Relator asserts the State seized evidence, specifically tennis shoes and a jersey, which 

contains biological material. 

Relator presents no statement of facts or argument in his petition. See TEX.R.APP.P.

52.3(g), (h). In his accompanying affidavit, Appellant avers that he served his “Chapter 64 

Motion” on the 346th District Court of El Paso, Texas on March 10, 2014. No copy of Relator’s

motion for forensic DNA testing was presented to the Court. Relator has not filed a copy of 

Respondent’s order denying Relator’s motion for DNA testing. See TEX.R.APP.P. 52.3(k)(1)(A).
2

To be entitled to mandamus relief, Relator must demonstrate that the act he seeks to 

compel is ministerial and that he does not have an adequate remedy at law. State ex rel. Young v. 

Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007)(orig. 

proceeding). Article 64.05 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure provides that an appeal 

under Chapter 64 is to a court of appeals in the same manner as an appeal of any other non-capital 

criminal matter. TEX.CODE CRIM.PROC.ANN. art. 64.05 (West 2006). Because Relator has an 

adequate remedy at law, he is not entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, Relator’s petition for 

writ of mandamus is denied.

August 6, 2014

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ.

(Do Not Publish)
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 218 (Wednesday, November 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60699-60700]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-29678]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP98-52-000]


Northwest Pipeline Corporation; Notice of Request Under Blanket 
Authorization

November 5, 1997.
    Take notice that on October 28, 1997, Northwest Pipeline 
Corporation (Northwest), 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108, 
filed a request with the Commission in Docket No. CP98-052-000, 
pursuant to Sections 157.205, and 157.211 of the Commission's 
Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA) for authorization to modify 
existing facilities at its Walker Hollow Meter Station in Uintah 
County, Utah to more efficiently accommodate existing deliveries of 
natural gas to Citation Oil & Gas Corp. At the Walker Hollow Delivery 
point, authorized in blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-433-
000, all as more fully set forth in the request on file with the 
Commission and open to public inspection.
    Northwest proposes to modify the Walker Hollow Meter Station by 
installing 50 percent restricted trip plates in the two existing 1-inch 
regulators and by installing a new 2-inch regulator with \1/4\-inch 
trip plate upstream of the two existing regulators to more accurately 
measure the low peak hourly flow rate of natural gas through the meter 
station. Northwest states that as a result of these modifications the 
maximum design capacity of the meter station will decease from 4,128 
Dth per day (at 65 psig) to approximately 408 Dth per day at a constant 
delivery pressure of 100 psig.
    Northwest further states that the cost of the proposed facility 
modification at the Walker Hollow Meter Station is estimated to be 
approximately $1,500.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after the 
Commission has issued this notice, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the 
Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or 
notice

[[Page 60700]]

of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of the Regulations 
under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the request. If not protest 
is filed within the allowed time, the proposed activity shall be deemed 
to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for filing a 
protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after 
the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be 
treated as an application for authorization pursuant to Section 7 of 
the NGA.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-29678 Filed 11-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M