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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           4,107
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   76,916
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    140,203
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               229,640
<PP&E>                                         372,344
<DEPRECIATION>                                 110,874
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 580,164
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          154,267
<BONDS>                                        136,875
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           104
<OTHER-SE>                                     220,911
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   580,164
<SALES>                                        533,335
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               533,335
<CGS>                                          440,825
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  440,825
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,769
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,582
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 45,094
<INCOME-TAX>                                    19,285
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             25,809
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (2,325)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    23,484
<EPS-BASIC>                                       2.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.21


</TABLE>
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 26, 2016

No. 04-16-00509-CR

Malcolm GANDY,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR6350

Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Court Reporter Mary Beth Sasala has not filed the reporter’s record on appellant’s pretrial hearing on a motion to suppress, upon which this appeal is based. Appellant’s notice of 

appeal, filed on August 5, 2016, attests the record was transcribed and Sasala was paid. 

It is therefore ORDERED that Mary Beth Sasala file the reporter’s record no later than 

September 30, 2016. No extensions of time will be allowed. 

_________________________________

Jason Pulliam, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 26th day of September, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
**EXHIBIT 23.02**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTEREDPUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference into the Company’spreviously filed Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-87922,333-67776, 333-107956 and 333-113871) of our report dated November 26, 2002(except as to Note 2, which is as of January 28, 2005), with respect to theconsolidated statements of operations, shareholders’ equity, and cash flows forVersant Corporation for the year ended October 31, 2002, and the relatedfinancial statement schedule, which report appears in the October 31, 2004annual report on Form 10-K of Versant Corporation.

 

Our report dated November 26, 2002 (except as to Note 2, which is as ofFebruary 11, 2005) contains an explanatory paragraph that states that theaccompanying consolidated financial statements for the year ended October 31,2002, have been restated.

 

 
| /s/ KPMG LLP      |   |
|-------------------|--------|
|              |
| San Jose, CA      |
| February 14, 2005 |

 

1

----
#### Lillie Bell KINCHEN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-877.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 26, 1970.

*750Pollack & Barone, Jack J. Taffer, Miami, Neale J. Poller, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Jesse J. McCrary, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and BARKDULL, JJ-

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was brought to trial upon an information charging the crime of robbery. At .the close of the case for the prosecution the trial judge denied appellant’s motion for a judgment of acquittal but reduced the charge to conspiracy to commit robbery. At the close of the testimony the judge adjudicated the appellant guilty of the charge as reduced.

Appellant urges that the conspiracy to commit robbery is not an offense included under the charge of robbery. Cf. Newkirk v. State, Fla.App. 1969, 222 So.2d 435. The state in its brief admits that it is unable to substantiate a contradictory position. We are convinced that the law has been correctly stated by the appellant. The adjudication and sentence are reversed with directions to discharge the appellant. Cf. Mackey v. State, Fla.App.1969, 223 So.2d 380.

This judgment is without prejudice to the state to proceed with a new prosecution for the crime of conspiracy to commit robbery.

Reversed.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 598

To amend the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969 to establish

a presumption of eligibility for disability benefits in the case of certain

coal miners who filed claims under part C of such Act between July

1, 1973, and April 1, 1980.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 26, 1993

Mr. KANJORSKI introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Education and Labor

A BILL

To amend the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act

of 1969 to establish a presumption of eligibility for disability benefits in the case of certain coal miners who

filed claims under part C of such Act between July

1, 1973, and April 1, 1980.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 598 IH

1 SECTION 1. PRESUMPTION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR DISABIL2 ITY BENEFITS UNDER THE BLACK LUNG BEN3 EFITS PROGRAM.

4 Section 422 of the Federal Coal Mine Health and

5 Safety Act of 1969 (30 U.S.C. 932) is amended by adding

6 after subsection (l) the following new subsection:

7 ‘‘(m)(1) Notwithstanding any other law, rule, or reg8 ulation, in the case of any claim filed under this part be9 tween July 1, 1973, and April 1, 1980, with respect to

10 a miner who has engaged in coal mining employment for

11 at least 10 years, such miner shall be presumed to be to12 tally disabled due to pneumoconiosis, or to have been to13 tally disabled due to pneumoconiosis, or the death of such

14 miner shall be presumed to be due to pneumoconiosis,

15 arising out of that employment, if any of the following

16 medical requirements is met:

17 ‘‘(A) A single positive chest roentgenogram (X18 ray), biopsy, or autopsy indicates the existence of

19 pneumoconiosis.

20 ‘‘(B) A single set of positive ventiliatory studies

21 indicates the presence of a chronic respiratory or

22 pulmonary disease.

23 ‘‘(C) A single set of positive blood gas studies

24 indicates the presence of an impairment in the

25 transfer of oxygen from the lungs to the blood.
3

•HR 598 IH

1 ‘‘(D) Other medical evidence, including the doc2 umented opinion of a physician exercising reasonable

3 medical judgment, indicates the presence of totally

4 disabling respiratory impairment.

5 ‘‘(2) The presentation of evidence which meets any

6 of the requirements under subparagraphs (A) through (D)

7 of paragraph (1) shall be sufficient to invoke the presump8 tion under such paragraph.

9 ‘‘(3) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to

10 require proof of any such medical requirement by a pre11 ponderance of the evidence or by any higher evidentiary

12 standard.’’.

Æ
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Wireless Frontier Internet, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Alex J. Gonzalez, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1)   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.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



Date:  November 22, 2004                   By:  /s/ Alex J. Gonzalez
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Alex J. Gonzalez
                                                Chief Executive Officer
#### David BAUM, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 66-1022.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

July 18, 1967.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 8, 1967.

Louis Glazer, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Arden M. Siegendorf, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and BARKDULL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See: Harrington v. State, Fla.App.1959, 110 So.2d 495; Garcia v. State, Fla.App.1959, 110 So.2d 709; Lambert v. State, Fla.App.1959, 111 So.2d 68; Chaudoin v. State, Fla.App.1960, 118 So. 2d 569; Dupuy v. State, Fla.App.1962, 141 So.2d 825; Fountain v. State, Fla.App.1963, 163 So.2d 30; § 776.011, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.
EXHIBIT 23.2

                     INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT


The Board of Directors
RSI Systems, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(commission File numbers 333-62573, 33-95912, 333-18613, 333-70773 and
333-46721) on Forms S-8 and S-3 of RSI Systems, Inc. of our report dated
September 7, 2000, relating to the balance sheet of RSI Systems, Inc. as of June
30, 2000 and the related statement of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash
flows for the year then ended, which report appears in the June 30, 2000 annual
report on Form 10-KSB of RSI Systems, Inc.




                                            /s/  LUND KOEHLER COX & ARKEMA, LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
September 27, 2000
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350


ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Certification of
CFO





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Frequency Electronics, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Alan L.
Miller, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that 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.





/s/   Alan
      Miller
              
              December
      15, 2009Alan
      L. MillerChief
      Financial Officer




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.




This
certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange
Act”).  Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it
by reference.
#### Lester M. GUEST and Insurance Company of North America, Petitioners, v. James PRESTON and the Industrial Relations Commission, Respondents.

No. 43404.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 25, 1973.

Certiorari denied.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
-77.6 -77.4 -77.2 -77.0 -76.8 -76.6 -76.4 -76.2 -76.0 -75.8

39.2 39.4 39.6 39.8 40.0



### ★

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 08/25 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 25 Aug 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.41 N 76.30 WMeters AGL
NO. 07-05-0376-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL B

	NOVEMBER 1, 2005

	______________________________

	IN RE KENDRICK J. FULTON, RELATOR

	_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

	MEMORANDUM OPINION

	In this original proceeding, relator, Kendrick J. Fulton, seeks a writ of mandamus directing the Honorable John B. Board of the 181st District Court to “order” service of process on the real parties in interest and to recuse himself from further proceedings involving the underlying suit.  We deny the petition.

	Rule 99 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure governs the issuance and form of citation.1  Pursuant to Rule 99, a party filing a petition is required to request that citation be served on the opposing party and to direct the clerk of the court where to serve the opposing party.  Rule 99(a).  Relator contends that the duty to order citation rests with the trial court judge.  Rule 99 clearly indicates the error of appellant’s position.  The law imposes no duty on the trial judge to monitor citation or to order citation be issued sua sponte.  A writ of mandamus issues only to correct a clear abuse of discretion or the violation of a duty imposed by law when there is no other adequate remedy at law.  Canadian Helicopters Ltd. v. Wittig, 876 S.W.2d 304, 305 (Tex. 1994) (orig. proceeding).  In as much as appellant has failed to show that the trial court abused its discretion by not issuing citation, relator’s request is denied.

	Relator also contends that the trial court should recuse itself from further proceedings.  Recusal of a judge is governed by the provisions of Rule 18(a).  This Rule requires the filing of a motion with the clerk of the Court  stating the grounds upon which the judge should recuse himself.  Id.  The only document before this court is relator’s petition.  None of the documents filed in the trial court are appended as required by the Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.3(j).  Therefore, we are unable to determine if any motion for recusal has been filed by relator.  Further, even if the motion has been filed with  the trial court and denied, a direct appeal is an adequate remedy and, thus, mandamus relief is not proper.  In Re Union Pac. Res. Co., 969 S.W.2d 427, 427 (Tex. 1998).  Accordingly, this part of relator’s request is denied.

	Having reviewed and rejected both of relators requests, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus.

	Mackey K. Hancock

	Justice
# CITY OF LINCOLN NEBRASKA

M

A

YO R C

H

R

IS

BEUTLE R l inco l n . ne.gov O

ffice of the Mayor 555 S o uth 10th Street 5uiteJO I L incoln, Nebras ka 68508 4 02 ·4 41

·75 11 fax :402 ·44 1 ·7120 mayor @ l i ncoln .n•.gov



# LINCOLN September 30, 20 II Mr. Victor Petrolati General Engineer Office of Building Technologies, EE-2J 1000 Independence Avenue Washington, D.C. 20585 Re: Impacts of Proposed Efficiency Standards for Industrial Battery Chargers Dear Mr. Petrolati: On behalf of the City ofLincoln, Nebraska, I am sending this correspondence due to possible impacts the proposed Efficiency Standards would have on a local business named Lester Electrical. Lester Electrical is an important component of Lincoln's economy. Lester is one of the nation's leading industrial and commercial battery charger manufacturers and has been in business since 1963. Ifthe proposed standards were implemented it would lead to significant workforce reductions. While ow- office supports energy and environmental sustainability initiatives, we find it hard to believe the Department ofEnergy (DOE) would enable rules that increase unemployment dw-ing extraordinarily difficult times for business and industry. In our discussions with Lester Electrical executives, it is ow- hope that the DOE reclassifies golf cars and associated battery charging systems as Non-Consumer products. We do not believe that golf cars meet the statutory definition of a "Consumer Product" as defined in section 32901(a)(3) of title 49

. An alternative would be to adopt a Candidate Standard Level Baseline (0). We strongly w-ge you to consider the consequences (intended or unintended) not only to Lester Electrical, but other businesses throughout the U.S. The most effective way of measuring these impacts is through open dialogue with business leaders. Please give this careful consideration before implementation. Regards,

# :;s;~ Chris Beutler

## ~ Mayor of Lincoln

cc: Mr. Michael Kido, U

.S. DOE Office of General Counsel Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S

. DOE, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated balance sheet and consolidated statement of operations which are 
included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K, and are qualified
in their entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-26-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-26-1997
<CASH>                                          44,026
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  390,468
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (10,066)
<INVENTORY>                                    281,605
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               804,677
<PP&E>                                         341,936
<DEPRECIATION>                               (100,534)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,810,352
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          480,930
<BONDS>                                        389,150
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            70
<OTHER-SE>                                     921,078
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,810,352
<SALES>                                      2,835,875
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,835,875
<CGS>                                        2,031,713
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  675,741<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (11,321)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              45,901
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 93,841
<INCOME-TAX>                                    35,103
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             58,738
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  1,450
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    57,288
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .94
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>The line 29 costs include $16,245 of non-recurring acquisition costs 
incurred in conjunction with business combinations accounted for under the 
pooling-of-interests method and restructuring costs of $4,395.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### BUENA VISTA CONSTRUCTION CO. et al., Appellants, v. SAUNA ROOMS OF AMERICAN, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 73-89.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 21, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                    UT
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000,000
<CIK>                                        0000357261
<NAME>                                       FLORIDA PROGRESS CORPORATION
       
<S>                                                    <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                           SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          9-MOS
<BOOK-VALUE>                                           PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                                  3,601
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                                  957
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       786
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                                     494
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                               224
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             6,062
<COMMON>                                                   1,209
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                                      0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                          671
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                             1,880
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                   34
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                                       2,343
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                             0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                                24
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                                 15
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                                      0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                                    0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                               0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                             1,766
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                              6,062
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                                  2,467
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                          49
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                                 2,208
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                                 2,257
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                                      210
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                             2
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                               212
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     105
<NET-INCOME>                                                 107
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                    1
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                                106
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                     153
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                                      0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                                       390
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               1.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               1.09
        


</TABLE>