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 statement of operations and consolidated balance sheet and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000022301
<NAME> COMCAST CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,265
<SECURITIES>                                       144
<RECEIVABLES>                                      513
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (96)
<INVENTORY>                                        305
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,286
<PP&E>                                           3,906
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,238)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  13,197
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,803
<BONDS>                                          6,787
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              500
<PREFERRED>                                         32
<COMMON>                                           349
<OTHER-SE>                                         566
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    13,197
<SALES>                                          2,315
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,315
<CGS>                                            (570)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  (2,077)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (126)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (279)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (82)<F1>
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (37)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (79)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   (23)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (102)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.32)
<FN>
<F1>loss before income tax expense and other items excludes the effect of
minority interests, net of tax, of $40.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
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 Annual Report of Electromed, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-K for the year ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Terry M. Belford, 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: September 14, 2011

/s/ Terry M. Belford
Terry M. BelfordChief Financial Officer

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

Ju ly 3 , 2019 

# Order

Clerk July 3 , 2019

159160 (31)

In re HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION

REGARDING CONSTITUTIONALITY OF

2018 PA 368 & 369 SC: 159160

_______________________________________ /

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion for the temporary admission of out

- of

state attorneys Seher Khawaja, Lynn Hecht Schafran, and Jennifer M Becker to appear and

practice in this case under MCR 8.126(A) is GRANTED

.
Dismissed and Opinion Filed December 7, 2015 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-15-01432-CV No. 05-15-01433-CV No. 05-15-01434-CV No. 05-15-01435-CV IN RE JASON ALLAN OJENA, Relator On Appeal from the Crimin al District Court No. 5 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F07-58985-L, F07-59105-L, F07-73821-L, F07-59037-L 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Franci s, Myers, and Schenck Opinion by Justice Francis In this petition for writ of mandamus, relator requests that the Court order the trial court to rule on his motion for an evidentiary hear ing. By order dated December 3, 2015, the trial court denied relator’s motion. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is now moot. See In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc., 166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005) (o rig. proceeding) ( “A case becomes moot if a controversy ceases to exist between the parties at any stage of the legal proceedings.”); State Bar of Tex. v. Gomez, 891 S.W.2d 243, 245 (Tex. 1994) (orig. proceeding) (stating that for controversy to be justiciable, there must be a r eal controversy between the parties that will be actually resolved by the judicial relief sought); Dow Chem. Co. v. Garcia, 909–2– S.W.2d 503, 505 (Tex. 1995) (orig. proceeding) (court will not i ssue mandamus if it would be useless or unavailing). We dismiss the petition fo r want of jurisdiction.

151432F.P05 /Molly Francis/ MOLLY FRANCIS JUSTICE
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 234 (Friday, December 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 64392]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31829]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
Division of Research Grants Special Emphasis Panel (SEP) meeting:

    Purpose/Agenda: To review individual grant applications.
    Name of SEP: Microbiological and Immunological.
    Date: December 10, 1997.
    Time: 2:00 p.m.
    Place: NIH, Rockledge 2, Room 5110 (Telephone Conference).
    Contact Person: Dr. Mohindar Poonian, Scientific Review 
Administrator, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5110, Bethesda, Maryland 
20892, (301) 435-1168.

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the above 
meeting due to the urgent need to meet timing limitations imposed by 
the grant review and funding cycle.
    The meeting will be closed in accordance with the provisions set 
forth in secs. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. Applications 
and/or proposals and the discussions could reveal confidential trade 
secrets or commercial property such as patentable material and personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the applications 
and/or proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 93.333, 
93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93,893, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: December 1, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 97-31829 Filed 12-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. ss.1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of
Reven Housing REIT, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2017 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Chad M. Carpenter and Thad L. Meyer, the
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



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



2.       The information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|By:    | /s/ Chad M. Carpenter                                |  | Dated: April 30, 2018
|------ | ---------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------
|       | Chad M. Carpenter                                    |  |                      
|Title: | Chief Executive Officer, Principal Executive Officer |  |                      
|       |                                                      |  |                      
|       |                                                      |  |                      
|By:    | /s/ Thad L. Meyer                                    |  | Dated: April 30, 2018
|       | Thad L. Meyer                                        |  |                      
|Title: | Chief Financial Officer, Principal Financial Officer |  |                      



This certification is made solely for the
purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose.
United States Position

AfDB Proposed Investment in BOKE Mine, Rail, and Port Project – Guinea

December 6, 2017

The U.S. acknowledges the strong need for private sector development in Guinea to improve 

livelihoods, reduce economic stresses, and rebuild investor and business confidence following 

the Ebola epidemic. While we remain skeptical of large extractives projects, we recognize the 

central role that mining plays in Guinea, given its natural endowments.

We are pleased to see the AfDB and World Bank Group cooperating on this sizeable project. 

Close monitoring by various stakeholders before, after mining operations begin, and beyond the 

mine’s life-cycle will be critical to its success.

Guinea is a biodiversity hotspot. If not managed with great care and foresight, the effects of this 

project risk irrevocable damage to critical habitat areas. We appreciate the hard work and 

cooperation by AfDB, IFC, the Government of Guinea, and many NGOs that laid the 

groundwork for Moyen-Bafing National Park. However, the use of an aggregate offset approach 

remains unproven, especially for the relevant species.

We also found problematic the lack of baseline data for several reptile species and the lack of an 

assessment of cumulative impacts from the future Koukoutamba dam. Both Bank Groups must 

remain engaged in resettlement, because the project will displace a large number of citizens and 

is located in an area where community grievances have occurred.

We welcome efforts to improve governance and technical capacity in Guinea, and a mindful 

approach to infrastructure development as the project’s ultimate success will depend on progress 

in these initiatives.

For legislatively mandated reasons, the United States wishes to be recorded as abstaining on this 

operation.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth J. LUMPKIN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-56625.

D.C. No. CV-00-00245-DT-2, CR-96-00442-DT-2.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 12, 2002.*

Decided Aug. 15, 2002.

Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, TASHIMA and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Kenneth J. Lumpkin appeals the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his conviction and 240-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine base and aiding and abetting, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 and 21 U.S.C. § 841. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s denial of Lumpkin’s motion to vacate, *see United States v. Chacon-Palomares,*208 F.3d 1157, 1158 (9th Cir. 2000), and we affirm.

Lumpkin argues that his counsel at trial provided ineffective assistance by failing to object, and seek severance based upon, the introduction of evidence of the confession by Lumpkin’s non-testifying co-defendant, evidence which implicated Lumpkin in vio*247lation of *Bruton v. United States,*391 U.S. 123, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968).

To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Lumpkin must show that his counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced his defense. *Strickland v. Washington,*466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

In this case, there was no clear *Bruton*violation. Moreover, the record overwhelmingly links Lumpkin to a conspiracy to distribute cocaine base and aiding and abetting. Lumpkin was not only observed by law enforcement agents assisting a drug trafficking transaction, but the testimony of a drug courier detañed Lumpkin’s specific involvement in the conspiracy.

Thus, regardless of whether or not the evidence of the co-defendant’s confession may have violated *Bruton,*taking into consideration the rest of the evidence against Lumpkin, it is not reasonably probable that the outcome of the trial would have been different, and there was no prejudice. *See id.*

Accordingly, the district court did not err in denying Lumpkin’s § 2255 motion to vacate.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
1
2 
3

 
4 
5

 

 
6

 
7

 
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
254 La. 761

#### PLANTATION PIPE LINE COMPANY v. KAISER ALUMINUM AND CHEMICAL CORPORATION.

No. 49944.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 1, 1969.

In re: Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corporation applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 222 So.2d 905.

The application is denied. According to the facts of this case the result is correct.

SANDERS, J., is of the opinion a writ should be granted.

SUMMERS, J., is of the opinion a writ should be granted.

BARHAM, J., is of the opinion the writ should be granted for the reasons assigned in the Court of Appeal dissent.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 20, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-41361

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE DE LA CRUZ-CAMACHO,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-02-CR-819-ALL

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

Before JONES, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Jose De La Cruz-Camacho appeals the sentence imposed

following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United

States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

De La Cruz-Camacho complains that his sentence was improperly

enhanced pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) based on a prior

conviction. He argues that the sentencing provision is

unconstitutional. De La Cruz-Camacho thus contends that his
No. 02-41361

-2-

sentence should not exceed the maximum terms of imprisonment

prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). 

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

De La Cruz-Camacho acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed

by Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS 

EMBARGOED UNTIL 9 AM (EST) March 15, 2006 

CONTACT Brookly McLaughlin (202) 622-1996 

TREASURY INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL DATA FOR JANUARY 

Treasury International Capital (TIC) data for January are released today and posted on the U.S. Treasury web 

site (www.treas.gov/tic). The next release date, which will report on data for February, is scheduled for 

April 17, 2006 

Net foreign purchases of long-term securities were $66.0 billion. 

• Net foreign purchases of long-term domestic securities were $78.0 billion, $20.2 billion of which 

were net purchases by foreign official institutions and $57.9 billion of which were net purchases by

private foreign investors. 

• U.S. residents purchased a net $12.0 billion in foreign issued securities. 

Foreigners’ Transactions in Long-Term Securities with U.S. Residents 

(Billions of dollars, not seasonally adjusted) 

12 Months Through

2004 2005 Jan-05 Jan-06 Oct-05 Nov-05 Dec-05 Jan-06 

1 Gross Purchases of Domestic Securities 15178.9 17043.2 15335.9 17187.8 1445.7 1426.6 1201.8 1439.5

2 Gross Sales of Domestic Securities 14262.4 16018.1 14425.2 16173.2 1336.1 1321.7 1127.2 1361.4

3 Domestic Securities Purchased, net (line 1 less line 2) /1 916.5 1025.1 910.7 1014.7 109.6 104.9 74.6 78.0

4 Private, net /2 680.9 913.6 690.8 897.5 96.7 99.0 64.2 57.9

5 Treasury Bonds & Notes, net 150.9 288.5 154.6 261.6 25.0 50.8 12.7 -4.0

6 Gov't Agency Bonds, net 205.7 193.5 203.1 191.8 29.4 8.6 9.2 18.1

7 Corporate Bonds, net 298.0 352.1 304.4 358.6 34.6 34.9 32.7 23.5

8 Equities, net 26.2 79.4 28.7 85.5 7.8 4.7 9.6 20.3

9 Official, net 235.6 111.5 219.9 117.2 13.0 5.9 10.4 20.2

10 Treasury Bonds & Notes, net 201.1 59.5 182.0 60.3 4.9 3.7 5.6 8.4

11 Gov't Agency Bonds, net 20.8 32.9 23.3 35.3 6.2 0.4 2.4 8.5

12 Corporate Bonds, net 11.5 18.6 12.3 19.6 1.7 1.7 2.4 2.3

13 Equities, net 2.2 0.5 2.4 2.0 0.2 0.1 -0.1 0.9

14 Gross Purchases of Foreign Securities 3123.1 3702.1 3100.7 3829.5 374.3 337.4 338.9 377.0

15 Gross Sales of Foreign Securities 3276.0 3859.3 3245.7 3992.9 377.5 353.8 359.6 389.1

16 Foreign Securities Purchased, net (line 14 less line 15) /3 -152.8 -157.2 -145.0 -163.4 -3.2 -16.4 -20.8 -12.0

17 Foreign Bonds Purchased, net -67.9 -30.3 -65.0 -28.9 2.8 0.9 -4.0 0.7

18 Foreign Equities Purchased, net -85.0 -126.9 -80.0 -134.5 -6.0 -17.2 -16.7 -12.8

19 Net Long-Term Flows (line 3 plus line 16) 763.6 867.9 765.7 851.3 106.5 88.5 53.8 66.0

/1 Net foreign purchases of U.S. securities (+)

/2 Includes International and Regional Organizations

/3 Net U.S. acquisitions of foreign securities (-)
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, November 26, 2019. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, November 26, 2019 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A20A0673. STANLEY STEED et al. v. MASTEC NORTH AMERICA, INC. et al.
Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion is hereby GRANTED.
0cFINALREPORTSubmittedto:Preparedby:MitsubishiChemicalMedienceCorporationDecember24,201310c2003004005006007008009001000II0012001300140015001600170018001900200021002200230240025002600270c280Appendix102900300Appendix203100320Appendix303300340Appendix403500360Appendix50370038003900400041004200430044004500460047
U.S. Position on the Asian Development Bank (ADB) Energy Policy

Supporting Low-Carbon Transition in Asia and the Pacific

October 20, 2021

The United States wishes to be recorded as abstaining on the ADB Energy Policy. 

The proposed new energy policy has the potential to have a profound effect not just on the 

region, but on the globe. This policy promotes energy access, yes, but just as importantly it 

addresses the climate crisis and contributions from the burning of fossil fuels. As the recent 

Independent Evaluation report on ADB Support for Action on Climate Change noted, 

greenhouse gas emissions in Asia continue to rise at an exponential rate. Given that emissions 

produced by fossil fuels are a major contributor to climate change, the report noted the Paris 

Agreement’s goals will not be met without Asia transitioning toward a low- carbon development 

pathway.

The proposed energy policy, to its credit, contains many elements that support such a transition. 

This includes, of course, a commitment not to finance any new coal-fired power or heating plants 

and an emphasis on financing renewable energy solutions and technological innovations. The 

policy also highlights the importance of an equitable and inclusive transition, good governance, 

and an investment climate that welcomes private financing for sustainable energy.

Yet, in the United States’ view, the policy does not go far enough. While the United States 

appreciates Management’s efforts to find a broad compromise, the United States cannot support 

an energy policy that allows the ADB to continue to finance fossil fuel projects – in this case, 

midstream and downstream natural gas – in middle- income and upper middle-income countries. 

This is inconsistent with the United States’ MDB fossil fuel guidance that was developed in 

response to President Biden’s Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and 

Abroad. It also conflicts with the importance of ambitious climate action by all countries to 

achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement.

While not part of the energy policy itself, the United States also notes strong concern over the 

specific language in the R-paper, that takes out of context, mischaracterizes, and singles out 

certain language from the Paris Agreement. The United States underscores that this language 

should not be understood as a reflection of the views of the shareholders and should not be used 

in future documents.