alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Father's Day, 2018

On Father's Day, we pay special tribute to the men who devote themselves to supporting and caring for their loved ones. We take this occasion to show our gratitude to our fathers, to thank them for inspiring us to be our best, and to appreciate the influence they have in shaping our character and guiding our futures.

Fathers across our country serve as role models for their children and families. Through their examples, they display the fundamental American values of hard work and dedication, which are so important to fulfilling our potential and achieving the American Dream. In each stage of our development, their unwavering support inspires us to take on the next big challenge and to pursue ambitious goals we might otherwise have thought beyond our reach. Their engagement in our communities, from the soccer field to Main Street to the town hall, enriches American life and encourages others to get involved.

As a Nation, we reaffirm our commitment to promoting fatherhood in our neighborhoods and communities. All fathers must know and harness their power to shape the future of their children. More and more, scientific studies show that fathers who actively invest in their children improve their lives emotionally, physically, academically, and economically. My Administration supports the continuation of grant funding to States and community organizations that educate men on the significance of active fatherhood and assist them with entering or staying in the workforce so they can contribu te to the emotional and financial well-being of their children and families.

Today, and every day, we honor our fathers who serve their families with humble and giving hearts. Whether we became their children through birth, adoption, or foster care, the incredible fathers in our lives generously share with us the powerful gifts of love and care through their presence and dedication. We express our love and gratitude to our fathers for the countless ways they have improved our lives and acknowledge the tremendous importance of active fatherhood to our families, communities, and country.

NOW, THERFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, in accordance with a joint resolution of the Congress approved April 24, 1972, as amended (36 U.S.C. 109), do hereby proclaim June 17, 2018, as Father's Day. I call on United States Government officials to display the flag of the United States on all Government buildings on Father's Day and invite State and local governments and the people of the United States to observe Father's Day with appropriate ceremonies.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fifteenth day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand eighteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-second.

[FR Doc. 2018-13514

Billing code 3295-F8-P
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Erroll L. MANUEL

No. 59458.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 21, 1977.

In re: Erroll L. Manuel applying for remedial writs.

Writ Denied:

Per Curiam. The defendant had no right of appeal from the revocation of his probation. *State v. Haynes,*255 La. 52, 229 So.2d 697 (1969); cf., La.Const. of 1975, Art. 5, Section 5(D). Treating this appeal as an application for a supervisory writ, Louisiana Supreme Court Rule 1, Section 11 (1975), we have examined the specifications of error and find them to be without merit. The application is therefore denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

THERESA MASON, § 

 § No. 37, 2014 

Respondent Below, § 

 Appellant, § Court Below: 

 § 

 § Family Court of the 

v. § State of Delaware, in and for 

 § New Castle County 

DIVISION OF FAMILY SERVICES, § 

 § File No. 13-08-10TN 

 § Petition No. 13-27308 

 Petitioner Below, § 

 Appellee. § 

 

Submitted: September 17, 2014 

Decided: September 18, 2014 

Before STRINE, Chief Justice, RIDGELY and VALIHURA, Justices. 

O R D E R

This 18th day of September 2014, the Court, having considered this 

matter on the briefs of the parties, and having concluded that the same should 

be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons assigned by the Family Court in 

its decision of December 30, 2013; 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgment 

of the Family Court be, and the same hereby is, AFFIRMED. 

 BY THE COURT: 

 /s/ Karen L. Valihura 

 Justice
258 La. 367

#### Henry BORDELON, Individually and as Administrator on Behalf of his Minor Son, Donald Bordelon v. The PHOENIX INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

No. 51337.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 22, 1971.

In re: Henry Bordelon applying for cer-tiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 244 So.2d 919.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal we find no error of law in its judgment.
I 

I 

Faulk, Scott {OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Joanie Tanabe <joanie.tanabe@gmail.com> 

Monday, November 25, 2013 1:52 PM 

EAS (OST) 

Kalaupapa Air Service 

Dear Department of Transportation (DOT), 

..... ; ,; __ 

I am a resident of "topside" Molokai and I am writing to support Mokulele Airline's 4-

year bid to link Kalaupapa to Kahului, Honolulu, Kapalua and Hoolehua. Mokulele will 

offer flights to various locations around Hawaii, and will allow for the comfort and 

convenience of the residents and employees of Kalaupapa to travel in and out of this 

remote, yet special place. 

Living on Molokai, we are accustomed to limited choices in travel. We have seen the 

cost of airfare rise in some airlines, while eliminating routes and convenient flight 

schedules. We have seen airlines that offer cheap rates, but restrict it's service 

destinations. We have seen airlines that have provided little to no service to those that 

pay for an important service, and airlines that have left altogether. I'm sure the 

residents of Kalaupapa have experienced similar situations in years past, and it is 

extremely frustrating and demoralizing for a community and it's people who work hard. 

Service is an aspect that has often been overlooked here. Some have just grown 

accustomed to "that's how it is, because this is Molokai." I am one to value service! In 

my experiences, people will often pay the price for excellent service. In keeping with 

the small-community lifestyle and the attitude that here on Molokai, we are all one 

family, I think it is most efficient and effective to offer both exceptional service and 

affordable fares, so that residents can have pleasant travel experiences and feel valued 

as people and customers. I feel that Mokulele offers both to the topside residents of 

Molokai, and will do the same for Kalaupapa. 

Mokulele is the best candidate as they have lower fares, experienced friendly agents, 

frequent flights, multiple islands and ease of booking via Global Distribution System 

(Expedia, Travelocity, Orbitz, Priceline, etc.). It is important we have safe, stable & 

affordable service to Kalaupapa. Please select Mokulele to serve Kalaupapa for 4 years. 

With Aloha, 

1 
Jeanie Tanabe 

l 

I ,, 

I 

¥, 

2
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Willie B. WARE, Appellee.

No. 70-903.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

*Oct.*6, *1971.*

Frank Schaub, State’s Atty., Bradenton, and Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellant.

Walter R. Talley, Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

On October 1, 1970, an information was filed against appellee charging him with a violation of F.S. § 790.001(2), F.S.A. by carrying a concealed firearm, a 20 gauge shotgun, on his person. Defense counsel filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that as per F.S. § 790.001(6) ,1 F.S.A. this particular firearm could not readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive. The defendant had the shotgun broken down into two separate pieces. He had the barrel of the gun under his left arm inside his shirt, and it extended down into his pants. The defendant then had the stock of the gun inside the front of his shirt. The shells for the gun were in the defendant’s right pants pocket. The trial court granted defendant’s motion after a hearing thereon. The state now appeals the order. We reverse.

During the hearing on defendant’s motion to dismiss the gun itself was marked as an exhibit and introduced into evidence. The arresting officer testified that the defendant could have removed the gun from beneath his clothing, assembled the gun for use, and loaded it in under 30 seconds.

*146Indeed, some could reach a different conclusion than that reached by the trial judge and hold that as a matter of law this firearm could quickly be assembled thereby giving the defendant ample opportunity to wield the gun in a manner which could easily inflict death or grievous bodily injury on its victim. Clearly the evidence presented creates a factual issue which should and can only be determined by a jury.

Therefore, the order is quashed and the cause is remanded with instructions to proceed in a manner not inconsistent with this opinion.

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and MANN and McNULTY, JJ., concur.

1

. F.S. § 790.001(6) “Firearm” means any weapon (including a starter gun) which will, or is designed to or may readily be converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such weapon; any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; any destructive device; or any machine gun. The term “firearm” shall not include an antique firearm.
#### Deanna PRESTON v. David PRESTON.

No. 38151.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 1969.

Rehearing Denied April 7, 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 216 So.2d 31.
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE>    5
<CIK>        0000225628
<NAME>       MEGADATA CORP

<S>                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            NOV-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              JUL-30-1999
<CASH>                                        14,486
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                426,021
<ALLOWANCES>                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                  386,766
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             873,525
<PP&E>                                     4,782,269
<DEPRECIATION>                             3,281,433
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             2,419,960
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      1,417,706
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                      32,031
<OTHER-SE>                                  (152,267)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               2,419,960
<SALES>                                      924,605
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             926,085
<CGS>                                        401,131
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              1,258,721
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            95,558
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (428,194)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (428,194)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                (428,194)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.17)





</TABLE>
#### Larry B. COHEN and Evelyn I. Cohen, Appellants, v. The FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI, etc., Appellee.

No. 44026.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 21, 1973.

Appeal dismissed.
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 on Form 10-Q of Florida Public Utilities Company (the "Company") for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-Q"), we, John T. English, Chief Executive Officer and George M. Bachman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of our knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)

The Form 10-Q 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 Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/John T. English

John T. English

Chief Executive Officer

August 10, 2006





/s/George M. Bachman

George M. Bachman

Chief Financial Officer

August 10, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,499
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (730)
<INVENTORY>                                    101,751
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               134,045
<PP&E>                                          45,813
<DEPRECIATION>                                (37,326)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 188,194
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           57,871
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     9,640,268
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   188,194
<SALES>                                        322,122
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               322,122
<CGS>                                          234,959
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  234,959
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                74,003
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   300
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,246
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,298
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,450
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,848
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,848
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.71
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.71
        


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29581-29582]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13481]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: June 25, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[reg] hereby 
gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on June 
19, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory

[[Page 29582]]

Commission a USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 450 to 
Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, 
Docket Nos. MC2018-183, CP2018-257.

Elizabeth Reed,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2018-13481 Filed 6-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
EX-23.2

                       Consent of Independent Accountants


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-495549, No. 333-30473, No. 333-89908, No.
333-45463, No. 333-55604, No. 333-63762, No. 333-49186 and No. 333-111511) and
Form S-3 (No. 333-47034, No. 333-47184, No. 333-47190, No. 333-70937, No.
333-102847, No. 333-102391, No. 333-101303, No. 333-100080, No. 333-92408, No.
333-89974, and No. 333-86438) of P-Com, Inc. of our report dated March 31, 2003,
except as to Notes 1c, 12b, 17d, 17e, 17f, and 17g as to which the date is
September 3, 2003, relating to the financial statements and financial statement
schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K.




PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
San Jose, California
March 30, 2004
#### Mollie L. Moon, Respondent, *v.*Getty Realty Corporation et al., Appellants.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

November 26, 1952.

*274
      *C. Lansing Hays, Jr.,*and *J. Arthur Leve*for appellants.

*Bruce McM. Wright*and *Lisle C. Garter, Jr.,*for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

This court has held that the right under the statute is strictly personal, and that the statute, penal in nature, must be strictly construed; the plaintiff must clearly bring himself within its terms *(Cohn*v. *Goldgraben,*103 Misc. 500). Section 41 of the Civil Rights Law provides that recovery may be had against any “ agency, bureau, corporation or association * * * by the person aggrieved thereby, ’ ’ while section 40 provides that all “ persons within the jurisdiction of this state shall be entitled to the full and equal accommodations,” etc. This would indicate that it was the legislative intent that the recovery be only in a person; it is apparent from the record ¿hat the plaintiff was not acting as an individual in her dealings with the defendants and therefore the defendants did not refuse the reservation to the plaintiff personally.

The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs^

Hofstadter, Schreiber and Hecht, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.
#### Thomas B. SHORT, Petitioner, v. Julius L. GROSSMAN, Respondent.

No. 39811.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 23, 1970.

Certiorari granted. 235 So.2d 11.

ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, DREW and ADKINS, JJ., concur.

THORNAL, J., dissents.
#### BIRD ROAD COMMERCIAL SITES, INC. v. FELDSTEIN et al.

No. 38092.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 1969.

Rehearing Denied March 27, 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 214 So.2d 658.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580

Courtney A. Estep

Acting Chief of Staff, Division of Advertising Practices

Bureau of Consumer Protection

January 4, 2024

Via Electronic Mail (lbrett@bbbnp.org)

Laura Brett, Esq.

Vice President

National Advertising Division

112 Madison Avenue, 3rd Floor

New York, NY 10016

Re: Advertising for SBLA Beauty

Dear Ms. Brett:

We have reviewed the National Advertising Division’s referral of SBLA Beauty’s

(“SBLA”) advertising of its Eye Lift Wand. NAD inquired about SBLA’s substantiation for 

advertising claims including “[t]ry the first-ever eyelift at home, clinically proven to lift & 

smooth the eyelid in minutes,” and before and after photos showing anti-aging improvements. In 

your September 28, 2023 referral letter, you advised us that SBLA declined to participate in a 

self-regulatory review by NAD. Consequently, NAD did not render an opinion on the challenge 

and referred the matter to the Federal Trade Commission for our review.

After FTC staff explained the reason for NAD’s referral and its potential consequences, 

the company agreed to re-engage with NAD. We understand from recent conversations with your 

staff that SBLA is actively cooperating with NAD.

Accordingly, it appears no additional FTC action is warranted at this time. The staff’s 

decision is not to be construed as a determination that a violation has not occurred. The 

Commission reserves the right to take such further action as the public interest may require. The 
Laura Brett, Esq.

Page 2

Commission fully supports NAD’s self-regulatory process, and we sincerely appreciate your 

referral and the opportunity to continue to assist in supporting the NAD.

 Sincerely,

 

 Courtney A. Estep

 Acting Chief of Staff

Division of Advertising Practices
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<S>                 <C>
<ARTICLE>          UT
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from FPL's condensed consolidated balance sheet as of
September 30, 1999 and condensed consolidated statements of income and cash flows for the nine months ended September 30,
1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.

<CIK>                                  0000037634
<NAME>              Florida Power & Light Company
<MULTIPLIER>                            1,000,000
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               9-MOS
<BOOK-VALUE>                             PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                  $7,944
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                $1,336
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                     $1,397
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                   $0
<OTHER-ASSETS>                             $370
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             $11,047
<COMMON>                                   $0
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                  $0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                        $0
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>             $4,876
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      $0
<PREFERRED>                                $226
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                       $2,079
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                         $0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                  $0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>             $0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>              $125
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                  $0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                $0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                           $0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>             $3,741
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>              $11,047
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                  $4,638
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                       $306
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                 $3,673
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                 $3,979
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                    $659
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                         $8
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>             $667
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   $125
<NET-INCOME>                               $542
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                $11
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>              $531
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                   $0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                  $0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                     $1,494
<EPS-BASIC>                              $0
<EPS-DILUTED>                              $0





</TABLE>