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


<ARTICLE>         5

<LEGEND>  This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from 
the March 31, 1997 consolidated balance sheet and the consolidated statements 
of income, reinvested earnings and cash flows for the three-month period ended 
03/31/97 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial 
statements.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>            1,000
       
<S>                                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                            DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                                 MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                                            22,431
<SECURITIES>                                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                    126,151
<ALLOWANCES>                                                       5,546
<INVENTORY>                                                      143,807
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 318,956
<PP&E>                                                         2,473,262
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   802,450
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 2,537,609
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            173,545
<BONDS>                                                          267,553
<COMMON>                                                          44,817
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                                     1,281,695
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   2,537,609
<SALES>                                                          379,841
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 379,841
<CGS>                                                            315,396
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    315,396
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                 7,828
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                   45,252
<INCOME-TAX>                                                      17,196
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                               28,056
<DISCONTINUED>                                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                        0
<CHANGES>                                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                                      28,056
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                       0.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0.62
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2472 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 2472

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 82422 Cadiz Jewett Road in Cadiz, Ohio, as the ``John Armor Bingham 
                             Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. JOHN ARMOR BINGHAM POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 82422 Cadiz Jewett Road in Cadiz, Ohio, shall be known and 
designated as the ``John Armor Bingham Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``John Armor 
Bingham Post Office''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 12, 2022.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
117th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 2472

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 82422 Cadiz Jewett Road in Cadiz, Ohio, as the ``John Armor Bingham 
                             Post Office''.
```
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 3 (Tuesday, January 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30962]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8994]

Determination Under Section 7012 of the Department of State, 
Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2014, 
Relating to Assistance to Zimbabwe

    Pursuant to the authority vested in me by section 7012 of the 
Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs 
Appropriations Act, 2014 (Div. K, P.L. 113-76) (SFOAA), E.O. 12163, as 
amended by E.O. 13346, and Delegation of Authority 245-1, I hereby 
determine that targeted assistance to Zimbabwe for health, good 
governance, education, leadership, family planning, agriculture and 
food security, poverty reduction, livelihoods, and macroeconomic growth 
including anti-corruption efforts, helping victims of trafficking, and 
combatting trafficking, as well as the continuation of assistance that 
would have a significant adverse effect on vulnerable populations if 
suspended, are in the national interest of the United States and 
thereby waive, with respect to Zimbabwe, the application of section 
7012 of the SFOAA for such assistance.
    This determination shall be reported to Congress and published in 
the Federal Register.

    Dated: November 24, 2014.
Heather Higginbottom,
Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources.
[FR Doc. 2014-30962 Filed 1-5-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-26-P
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

ELBERT L. HATTEN, JR.,

Petitioner

v.

J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT SERVICES, INC. 

(WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEAL 

BOARD),

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 214 EAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 15th day of February, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
AFS-15-1308-E

June 17, 2015

 Exemption No. 10918A

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2013-0779

Mr. Edward Dunlap, Manager

L1011 Operations

Orbital Sciences Corporation

P.O. Box 1087

Mojave, CA 93502

Dear Mr. Dunlap:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption 

No. 10918. It explains the basis for our decision, describes its effect, and lists the conditions 

and limitations.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated April 14, 2015, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Orbital Science Corporation (OSC) for an extension of Exemption No. 10918. That 

exemption from part 60 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) that allows OSC to 

extend the expiration date of its current qualification for an additional 18 months for its 

Lockheed L1011 Flight Simulation Training Device (FSTD) Federal Aviation Administration 

Identification Number (FAA ID) 0049.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a 

precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to OSC.
2

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 10918

remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the 

authority provided by 49 U.S.C. §§ 106(g), 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator 

has delegated to me, Orbital Science Corporation is granted an extension to Exemption No. 

10918, from 14 CFR part 60, to the extent necessary to allow Orbital to extend the expiration 

date of its current qualification for an additional 6 months for its Lockheed L1011 FSTD FAA 

ID 0049.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 10918 to December 31, 2015,

unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely,

/s/

John Barbagallo

Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

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

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

** **

Theundersigned officer of Courier Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifiesthat the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 27,2008 to which this certification is attached (the “Report”), as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| *  February 2, 2009* |   | By:                       | *  /s/Peter M. Folger* |
|-------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------|----------------------------------|
|                                | Date   |                      | Peter M. Folger                  |
|                                |   | Senior Vice President and |
|                                |   |                      | Chief Financial Officer          |
|                                     |        |                           |                                  |  |  |

 

This certification shall not be deemed “filed” for any purpose, nor shallit be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing, under theSecurities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

 

----
## THE AXTCBRNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

February25,1976

The HonorableWilliam A. Webb Opinion No. B-787 Acting Commissioner Coordinating Board Re: Whether the CoorainTexas College and University ating Board's policy Sy8tenl statement on academic P. O:Sox 12780,Capitol Station freedom and responsibilAustin, Texa8 70711~ ity is amandate or a recommendation. Dear CommissionerWebb: You have requested our opinion regarding a portion of section 61.057 of the Education Code,which reads, inpertinent part: To achieve excellence in the teaching

of students at institutionsand agencies of higher education, the [Coordinating Bloard shall: (1) develop and recommend:

..~.

. . . (E) minimum standards for academic freedom,academic responsibility and tenure. . . . You ask whether an institution of higher education is required under this provision to adopt the terms of the Board's policy statement on academic freedom.

p.3319The HonorableWilliam A. Webb - page 2 H-787

Although the statute'clearlyrequires the Coordinating Board to "developand recommend"minimum standards, it imposes no obligation upon any institutionto adopt those standards. The use of the term "recommend"leaves no room for doubt. Its primary meaning is advisory rather than obligatory. In re -- Estate of Ho an, 146 N.W.Zd 257, 259 (Iowa1966). See also mgg)$& ~~~~~B~~~~d:~:t~pdv~'~~l~~~~~ P.2a 943, 946.M. 6);oie v. Gates,116 Cal. Rptr. 172, 170 (Ct.App. 1974). &i~is~ our opinion that an institution of higher education is not required by section 61:057 of the Education Code to adopt the terms of the Coordinating Board's policy statementon academic freedom. We express no view on your secondquestion which asks whether or inwhatmanner theBoard shouldmodify the langage of its policy statement. SUMMARY An institution of higher education is not required by section 61.057 of the Education Code to adopt the terms of the Coordinating Soard'spolicy statement on academic freedom. Very truly yours,

&PROVED:

Opinion Committee jwb

p. 3320
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Gerald A. BOSWORTH.

No. 61492.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 10, 1978.

In re: Gerald A. Bosworth applying for supervisory writs. Parish of Terrebonne.

Writ granted.

The petition of the relator in the above entitled and numbered case having been duly considered,

It is ordered that a Writ of Certiorari issue herein, directing the Honorable Wil-more J. Broussard, Jr., Judge of the Thirty-Second Judicial District, Court for the Parish of Terrebonne, to transmit to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, on or before the 24th day of February, 1978, the record in duplicate, or a certified copy of the record in duplicate, of the proceedings complained of by the relator herein, to the end that the validity of said proceedings may be ascertained.

It is further ordered that the aforesaid Judge of said Court and the respondent through counsel shall show cause, in this court, on a date to be fixed by this Court, why the relief prayed for in the petition of the relator should not be granted.

SUMMERS, J., dissents.
Order entered June 5, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 12
- 01562
- CR
RICHARD WAYNE HENDER SON, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F00
- 55020
- Q 

### O RDER
The Court DENIES appellant’s May 31, 2013 pro se “Motion for Doctrine of Estoppel.” The Court dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction on February 25, 2013 and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused appellant’ s petition for discretionary review on May 15, 2013. The Court has no jurisdiction over collateral attacks to the conviction.

/s/ JIM MOSELEY JUSTICE
#### Harold STERIN v. CITY OF MIAMI (2 cases).

Nos. 37953, 37954.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 1969.

Rehearing Denied June 10, 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. So.2d 358, 214 So.2d 360. 214
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Alvin STURGILL, Appellee.

No. 70-297.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 24, 1971.

Rehearing Denied March 24, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affimied.
#### Glenn Terrell TREECE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-366.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 25, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Other

336.1948
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

February 19, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
135422 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan STATE TREASURER, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 135422 COA: 278820 Bay CC: 06-003120-CZ GARY GROSSNICKLE, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 30, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

0211 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 19, 2008

Clerk
STEAM ELECTRIC

C B I R E P L AC E M E NT P A G E

EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 20 09

- 0819

DCN:

________________________________________

T H E FO LL OW ING H AS BEE N R E M O V E D BE CAUSE IT

C O N T AINS C O N F ID E N T IAL B USIN E SS IN FO RMA T I O N

(C B I) P E R 4 0 C F R P ART 2

, SU B P ART B

. SE 04 331A019
EXHIBIT 32.0

| (1)   | The      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended November 14,      2009 (the “Form 10-Q/A”) of the Company 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 Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of the      Company. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                           |   |   |                                                                      |   |
|------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| /s/Renato      Cataldo                         |   |   | /s/Dale      Heins                                                        |   |
| Renato      Cataldo                            |   |   | Dale      Heins                                                           |   |
| President      andChief      Executive Officer |   |   | Senior      Vice President, Finance,Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |   |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           2,903
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,069
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      4,738
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                23,223
<PP&E>                                           5,190
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  29,820
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,060
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           176
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,996)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    29,820
<SALES>                                         36,346
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                43,051
<CGS>                                           32,685
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   39,097
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,899
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,663
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (13,733)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,924)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (10,809)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,809)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.612)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.612)
        

</TABLE>
TREASURY ANNOUNCES MARKET FINANCING ESTIMATES

Today, the Treasury Department announced net borrowing of marketable debt for the April –

June 2004 and July – September 2004 quarters.

Quarter

Estimated

Borrowing 

($ billion)

End-of-Quarter

Cash Balance

($ billion)

Apr-Jun 2004 $38 $45

Jul-Sep 2004 $91 $35

Since 1997, the average forecast error in net market borrowing for the current quarter is $10 

billion, of which $1 billion is attributable to differences in the end-of-quarter cash balance. 

Similarly, the average forecast error for the following quarter is $45 billion, of which $10 billion 

is attributable to differences in the end-of-quarter cash balance.

The following tables display and reconcile the variation between forecasted and actual net 

marketable borrowing in the Jan - Mar 2004 quarter.

Quarter Estimated 

Borrowing

($ billions)

Actual

Borrowing

($ billions)

Estimated

End-of-Quarter 

Cash Balance

($ billions)

Actual

End-of-Quarter 

Cash Balance

($ billions)

Jan - Mar 

2004

$177 $146 $20 $21

-moreCategories

Chg from 

Feb Estimate

Receipts +$30**

Outlays +$4

Non-Marketable 

Activity

-$2

Change in Cash

Balance

-$1

** includes tax refunds

Additional financing details relating to Treasury’s Quarterly Refunding will be

released at 9:00 A.M. on Wednesday, May 5.

-30-
#### Alonzo HARRELL, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Respondent.

No. 72-887.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 1, 1972.

Alonzo Harrell, pro. se.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Reeves Bowen, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner asks delayed appellate review pursuant to Baggett v. Wainwright, Fla. 1969, 229 So.2d 239. His direct appeal was dismissed as untimely filed. His first petition for delayed appellate review was denied without opinion for the same reasons we must deny this second one. Harrell’s allegation is that the public defender failed to take an appeal. He does not allege that he was not advised of his right to appeal and to counsel on appeal, if indigent, nor does he allege that he requested the lawyer appointed to represent 'him to file an appeal. In short, he has not alleged any action on the part of the state’s agents which has denied him the right to appellate review. The taking of an appeal is not automatic, and it is not, in fact, the normal thing to do unless there is some reason to believe that the proceedings in the trial court should be reviewed by an appellate court. This second Baggett-type petition was filed initially in the Supreme Court and properly transferred here. The first was not denied “arbitrarily and capricious” (sic), as Harrell represented to the Supreme Court. It was denied because Harrell has not made any showing of deprivation of his right to appeal through the fault of the state’s agents, including the public defender. We would suggest that Harrell consult the Legal Aid and Public Defender Clinic at the Spessard L. Holland Law Center, University of Florida, Gainesville, to determine whether in fact he has a right to delayed appeal and, if so, to seek help in the framing of a proper petition. Harrell assets that he has an absolute right *185to appeal, which is true, but appeal is not automatic, and, if notice of appeal is not timely filed, the right is waived unless the failure to file resulted from state action. Accordingly, the petition is denied without prejudice.

LILES, Acting C. J., and MANN and McNULTY, JJ„ concur.
#### Leon SEPT, Petitioner, v. CAMBRON CONSTRUCTION CO. et al., Respondents.

No. 43106.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 7, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ADKINS and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ERVIN, J., dissents.