alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

     <ARTICLE>                      BD
     <LEGEND>                       0
     <RESTATED>
     <CIK>                          0000909108
     <NAME>                         0
     <MULTIPLIER>                   1
     <CURRENCY>                     U.S. DOLLARS
     <PERIOD-START>                 JUN-01-1998
     <PERIOD-TYPE>                  6-MOS
     <FISCAL-YEAR-END>              FEB-28-1999
     <PERIOD-END>                   AUG-31-1999
     <EXCHANGE-RATE>                1
     <CASH>                         3,765,628
     <RECEIVABLES>                  263,181
     <SECURITIES-RESALE>            0
     <SECURITIES-BORROWED>          0
     <INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>            9,091,692
     <PP&E>                         221,650
     <TOTAL-ASSETS>                 14,413,669
     <SHORT-TERM>                   0
     <PAYABLES>                     710,615
     <REPOS-SOLD>                   0
     <SECURITIES-LOANED>            0
     <INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>             0
     <LONG-TERM>                    0
     <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>          0
     <PREFERRED>                    0
     <COMMON>                       8,886,243
     <OTHER-SE>                     4,165,811
     [TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY] 14,413,669
     <TRADING-REVENUE>              287,493
     <INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>           78,784
     <COMMISSIONS>                  184,591
     <INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>  0
     <FEE-REVENUE>                  496,462
     <INTEREST-EXPENSE>             301
     <COMPENSATION>                 248,500
     <INCOME-PRETAX>                160,759
     <INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>     160,759
     <EXTRAORDINARY>                0
     <CHANGES>                      0
     <NET-INCOME>                   106,949
     <EPS-BASIC>                 .01
     <EPS-DILUTED>                 .01

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31(1)



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

FLORIDA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPANY

(Section 302)

I, John T. English, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Florida Public Utilities Company (the registrant);

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.



Date: August 11, 2004



By  /s/ John T. English

John T. English

Chief Executive Officer
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8198 

To amend the FAST Act to add activities relating to the extraction, recovery, 

or processing of certain materials to the definition of a critical project, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 11, 2020 

Mr. BARR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the FAST Act to add activities relating to the 

extraction, recovery, or processing of certain materials 

to the definition of a critical project, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Security 

5 Through America’s Resources and Permitting Reform Act 

6 of 2020’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8198 IH

1 SEC. 2. PERMIT PROCESS FOR PROJECTS RELATING TO EX2 TRACTION, RECOVERY, OR PROCESSING OF 

3 CRITICAL MATERIALS. 

4 (a) DEFINITION OF COVERED PROJECT.—Section 

5 41001(6)(A) of the FAST Act (42 U.S.C. 4370m(6)(A)) 

6 is amended— 

7 (1) in clause (i)(III), by striking ‘‘; or’’ and in8 serting a semicolon; 

9 (2) in clause (ii)(II), by striking the period and 

10 inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

11 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

12 ‘‘(iii) is related to the extraction, re13 covery, or processing from coal, coal waste, 

14 coal processing waste, pre-or post-combus15 tion coal byproducts, or acid mine drainage 

16 from coal mines of one of the following 

17 materials for the purposes of securing the 

18 economic and national security of the 

19 United States: 

20 ‘‘(I) Critical minerals (as such 

21 term is defined in Executive Order 

22 13817 (30 U.S.C. 1601 note)). 

23 ‘‘(II) Rare earth elements. 

24 ‘‘(III) Microfine carbon or carbon 

25 from coal.’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 8198 IH

1 (b) REPORT.—Not later than 6 months after the date 

2 of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior 

3 shall submit to the Committees on Energy and Natural 

4 Resources and Commerce, Science, and Transportation of 

5 the Senate and the Committees on Transportation and In6 frastructure, Natural Resources, and Energy and Com7 merce of the House of Representatives a report evaluating 

8 the timeliness of implementation of reforms of the permit9 ting process required for activities described in section 

10 41001(6)(A)(iii) of the FAST Act (42 U.S.C. 

11 4370m(6)(A)). 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 31(b)
I, John D. Milton, Jr., certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Florida Rock Industries,
Inc;

2.	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to
the period covered by this report;

3.	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;

4.	The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and have:

a.	designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls to be designed under our supervision,
to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;

b.	evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosures controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluations; and

c.	disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting and

5.	The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a.	all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal controls over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information and

b.	any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant's internal controls over financial reporting.

Date:  January 27, 2005
                                       JOHN D. MILTON, JR.
                                                JOHN D. MILTON, JR.
                                                Executive Vice President,
                                                Treasurer and Chief
                                                Financial Officer
1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000037664
<NAME> UNITED TELEPHONE COMPANY OF FLORIDA
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                           3,691
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  160,163
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,265
<INVENTORY>                                     26,568
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               202,859
<PP&E>                                       2,561,201
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,181,819
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,633,826
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          230,915
<BONDS>                                        437,405
<COMMON>                                        16,250
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     675,264
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,633,826
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               670,206
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  417,768
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              28,730
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                146,578
<INCOME-TAX>                                    48,089
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             78,996
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    78,996
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### M. Pickett MYERS, III, Appellant, v. Elizabeth L. MYERS, Appellee.

No. 46280.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

June 18, 1971.

Townsend & McWilliams, Drew, for appellant.

Mansour & Kilpatrick, Greenville, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       78,705
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                          0
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                          12,666
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                         2,242
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                   3,239
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  96,652
<COMMON>                                         4,815
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                        9,299
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             16,896
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                  29,114
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        600
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                            23,500
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                               8,400
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                        0
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  35,038
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                   96,652
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                       55,363
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                             1,362
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      15,884
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      17,246
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                          4,697
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                 228
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                   4,925
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         2,187
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,738
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         21
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                    2,717
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         1,494
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                        1,677
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                           7,632
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.90


</TABLE>
#### Morris WALTERS and Joice Walters, his wife, Appellants, v. Lawrence F. GALLMAN and Patricia J. Gallman, his wife, Appellees.

No. 73-539.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 14, 1973.

Nathan Loeb, Orlando, for appellants.

William J. Smith, Orlando, for appellees.

MAGER, Judge.

The facts pertinent to the, disposition of this appeal reflect that defendants, subsequent to the foreclosure sale of their property pursuant to a judgment of foreclosure and within ten days after the filing of a certificate of sale but *prior*to the issuance of a certificate of title, filed objections to said foreclosure sale and sought to exercise their right of redemption. From an order overruling defendants’ objections to the sale and the issuance of a certificate of title (and in effect precluding the exercise of the right of redemption) this appeal ensued.

Essentially, the question presented for this court’s determination is whether the right of redemption must be exercised “before the sale”, as set forth in F.S. Section 45.031(1), F.S.A., which provides, in part, as follows:

> “In cases *when a person has an equity of redemption,*the court shall not specify a time for the redemption, *but the person may redeem the property at any time before the sale.”*(Emphasis added.)

The identical question was considered by the Third District in Allstate Mortgage Corp. of Florida v. Strasser, Fla.App.1973, *277*So.2d 843. We adopt the rationale of *Strasser*wherein the court, in concluding that redemption may be granted *subsequent*to the day of sale, observed, in part:

> “. . . Inasmuch as that portion of the statute pertaining to time of redemption *does not clearly change the common law right of redemption up until confirmation of the sale, we must hold the common law rule prevails.*

> 

> *“. .*.we hereby find that the Legislature intended to adopt the recognized meaning of the word ‘sale’ and that the sale did not take place until ownership of the property was transferred. Said transfer takes place according to § 45.-031(3), Fla.Stat., F.S.A., ten days after *276the day of the sale, upon no objections being filed thereto and issuance of the certificate of title.

> “Based on the foregoing, we find the trial court had the power to grant a right of redemption *up until the issuance of*a certificate of title. . . .” (Emphasis added.)

Cf. Roberts v. J. I. Kislak Mortgage Corporation, Fla.App.1972, 257 So.2d 599.

Defendants having sought to exercise their right of redemption subsequent to sale but *prior*to the issuance of a certificate of title, the order appealed from must be reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

WALDEN and DOWNEY, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1998
<CASH>                                       3,273,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,525,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   462,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,791,000
<PP&E>                                       5,117,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,078,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,920,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,913,000
<BONDS>                                      1,080,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        86,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,339,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,920,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,755,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,032,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                37,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                629,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   238,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            391,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   391,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .04
        

</TABLE>
#### Billy Washington PITTS v. L. L. WAINWRIGHT.

No. 38770.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Aug. 1969.

Habeas Corpus denied without opinion.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-1234

BRIAN L. HOWARD; LINDA B. HOWARD,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

LAMBERTS CABLE SPLICING, a/k/a Lamberts’ Cable

Splicing Company, Inc., a/k/a Lambert’s Cable

Splicing Company, a/k/a Lamberts Cable

Splicing Company, LLC, a Delaware LLC, a/k/a

Lamberts Cable Splicing Company of Florida,

LLC; THOMAS L. LAMBERT, a/k/a Thomas L.

Lambert, Jr., a/k/a Tom Lambert, a/k/a Tom or

Thomas Lambert, Jr., a/k/a Tommy Lambert;

KAREN LAMBERT ALLEN, a/k/a Karen Lambert

Allan; DYCOM INDUSTRIES CORPORATION, a/k/a

Dycom Corporation, a/k/a Dycom Investments,

Inc.,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior

District Judge. (5:05-cv-00636-F)

Submitted: June 15, 2006 Decided: June 19, 2006

Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
- 2 -

Brian L. Howard, Linda B. Howard, Appellants Pro Se. Scott David

Zimmerman, BROWN & BUNCH, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Brian L. Howard and Linda B. Howard appeal the district

court’s order dismissing their civil action for lack of subject

matter jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 28 U.S.C.

§ 1332 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. See Howard v. Lambert Cable Splicing, No. 5:05-cv00636-F (E.D.N.C. Dec. 15, 2005). We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED