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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       9,203,443
<SECURITIES>                                   250,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  621,613
<ALLOWANCES>                                    72,000
<INVENTORY>                                    624,849
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,685,966
<PP&E>                                      80,197,944
<DEPRECIATION>                              34,551,822
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              58,901,313
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       13,023,080
<BONDS>                                     14,643,172
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       344,936
<OTHER-SE>                                  30,890,125
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                58,901,313
<SALES>                                      8,547,651
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            59,211,230
<CGS>                                        7,554,325
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               35,040,778
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            23,937,220
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,433,271
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,854,103)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (634,881)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,219,222)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,219,222)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.27)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32-2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Goldfield Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the six months ended June 30, 2010
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stephen R. Wherry, Senior Vice President, Treasurer, Assistant Secretary and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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



/S/     STEPHEN R.
WHERRYStephen R. WherrySenior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer), Treasurer and Assistant SecretaryAugust 13, 2010
##### **Exhibit 23**

 

Consent of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm

 

 

 

 

TheBoard of Directors

NeoRx Corporation:

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registrationstatements Nos. 333-35442, 333-45398, 333-111344, 333-113706, and 333-115497 onForms S-3 and in the registration statements Nos. 333-89476, 333-71368,33-43860, 33-46317, 33-87108, 333-32583, 333-41764 and 333-115729 on Forms S-8of NeoRx Corporation of our report dated March 28, 2005 with respect to theconsolidated balance sheets of NeoRx Corporation as of December 31, 2004 and2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders’equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in thethree-year period ended December 31, 2004, management’s assesment of theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004,and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as ofDecember 31, 2004, which reports appear in the December 31, 2004, annual reporton Form 10-K of NeoRx Corporation.

 

Our report dated March 28, 2005 contains anexplanatory paragraph that states that the company has suffered recurringlosses, has had significant recurring negative cash flows from operations, andhas an accumulated deficit that raise substantial doubt about its ability tocontinue as a going concern.  Theconsolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that mightresult from the outcome of that uncertainty.

 

 
| /s/  KPMG LLP |
|---------------|

 

Seattle,Washington

March 28, 2005

 

----
Exhibit   32.2

CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT  TOSECTION 906 OF THE  SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual  Report of COMC, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the period  ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission  on the date hereof (the “Report”), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S)1350,  as adopted pursuant to (S)906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Marc Dell’Immagine,  Controller and Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, that to  the best of 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/ Marc Dell’Immagine                      |   |
|--------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                  |   |
| Name: Marc Dell’Immagine                    |   |
| Controller and Principal      Accounting Officer |   |
| April 12, 2004                                   |   |

 

_______________________

A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS  WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO COMC, INC. AND  WILL BE RETAINED BY COMC, INC. AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE  COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST.

----
* AC= An Automated Communication via Email 

Customer begins entering Work Requests (WR) in eRETA

Pre-Planning Status Customer saves WR information

Unassigned Status Customer sends WR to GSA

*AC10: New WR is submitted to GSA

Planning/Estimate 

Status

1. GSA assigns PM/POC to project or service

*AC1: Unassigned WR is assigned

2. GSA PM/POC and Customer develop requirements 

(Scope, Estimates) 

---- This timeframe varies depending on type of project or service ----

 *AC15: Summary Cost Estimate is approved and linked to WR

3. Customer enters remaining information and sends RWA 

to GSA for acceptance 

Pending-New Status GSA reviews and enters GSA-specific information 

*AC12: WR/RWA Sent for Acceptance

Sig-Requested Status GSA routes for digital signatures

Accepted Status Customer and GSA digitally sign RWA via DocuSign Email

*Acceptance Letter sent

May take up to 15 business days from customer sending 

RWA for acceptance to GSA routing for signatures

GSA may take up to 5 business days to 

assign a PM

Work Request-RWA Flowchart

Start

Finish

RWA work may begin
# C_2022418EN.01002301.xml

| 31.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 418/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 418/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Stowarzyszenie chłodnictwa klimatyzacji i pomp ciepła v Commission

(Case T-123/21) (1)

(Environment - Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 - Fluorinated greenhouse gases - Placement on the market - Release for fee circulation - Electronic registry for quotas for placing hydrofluorocarbons on the market - Decision to register - Authorisation to use a quota)

(2022/C 418/29)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Stowarzyszenie chłodnictwa klimatyzacji i pomp ciepła (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: A. Galos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. Sanfrutos Cano and M. Rynkowski, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 15 December 2020 to enter the reduction of its quotas pursuant to Article 25(2) of Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on fluorinated greenhouse gases and repealing Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 (OJ 2014 L 150, p. 195) in the electronic registry for quotas for placing hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) on the market.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Stowarzyszenie chłodnictwa klimatyzacji i pomp ciepła to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Stowarzyszenie chłodnictwa klimatyzacji i pomp ciepła to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 148, 26.4.2021.

---
H. Res. 314

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

November 19, 1993.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule

XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 3351) to amend the Omnibus Crime Control

and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to allow grants for the purpose

of developing alternative methods of punishment for young

offenders to traditional forms of incarceration and probation.

The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. General

debate shall be confined to the bill and the amendments made

in order by this resolution and shall not exceed one hour

equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking

minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. After

general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment

under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as

an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the fiveminute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in
2

HRES 314 EH

the bill, modified by the amendment printed in part 1 of the

report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute,

as modified, shall be considered as read. No amendment to

the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as

modified, shall be in order except those printed in part 2 of

the report of the Committee on Rules. Each amendment may

be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be

considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified

in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent

and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and

shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question

in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points

of order against the amendment numbered 5 in part 2 of the

report are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the

bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the

bill to the House with such amendments as may have been

adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the

House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the

Whole to the bill or to the amendment in the nature of a substitute made in order as original text. The previous question

shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments
3

HRES 314 EH

thereto to final passage without intervening motion except

one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### BYRON HOLDING CORP., a Florida corporation, Petitioner, v. Malva-Lynn COHEN, Respondent.

No. 73-966.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 24, 1973.

Cushman & Cushman, Miami for petitioner.

Lionel Barnet, North Miami Beach, for respondent.

Before PEARSON, CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

We are presented with a petition for certiorari to review an order of the trial court which struck defendant’s answer upon the failure of defendant’s attorney to attend a call of a trial calendar for cases to be set during a two week period. The petitioner urges that the trial court’s order departs from the essential requirements of law in that no statute or rule authorizes or empowers a trial court to strike a defendant’s answer for failure to appear at the call of a trial calendar or a part thereof. We agree and quash the order striking defendant’s answer. Defendant was notified of the calendar call at which his case would be given a specific day’s setting by service of a copy of an order entitled “Order Setting Cause for Trial and Pretrial Order.”1

The respondent urges that the action of the trial judge is authorized by Rule 1.-200(b), RCP, 30 F.S.A., which provides that a defendant’s pleadings may be stricken upon his failure to attend a pretrial conference. This reliance is obviously mistaken because the order setting cause for trial did not provide for a pretrial conference. The order is in two parts; the first part provides for a special call of the calendar, while the second part orders that discovery and exchange of witnesses and documents must be completed by specified dates.

*413The ordinary result of a failure to attend a special call of a trial calendar is to subject oneself to a setting of the cause for trial without opportunity to object. In the present case, nothing appears in the record which would call for special punishment of the defendant. Therefore, the order striking defendant’s answer is quashed and the cause is remanded for trial according to the rules.

It is so ordered.

1

. The material portions of the order are as follows:

> “THIS CAUSE is specifically set for trial before a jury and the undersigned judge in a courtroom assigned to his use in the Dade County Courthouse, Miami, Florida, the two week period of JULY 2,1973.

> “Call of the Trial Calendar shall be held on JUNE 27, 1973, at 12:00 NOON. FAILURE TO APPEAR AT SAID CALL SHALL BE SUBJECT TO DISMISSAL OF THE PLAINTIFF OR STRIKING OF ALL PLEADINGS OF THE DEFENDANT. ALL ATTORNEYS MUST BE PRESENT.”
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000756680
<NAME>                        HMG Worldwide Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1999
<CASH>                                         5,973
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  13688
<ALLOWANCES>                                   781
<INVENTORY>                                    26385
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               49,436
<PP&E>                                         12,979
<DEPRECIATION>                                 3,102
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 70,038
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          44,006
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       120
<OTHER-SE>                                     13,436
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   70,038
<SALES>                                        80,045
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               80,045
<CGS>                                          57,145
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  21,349
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,797
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (31)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (31)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (31)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .00



</TABLE>
#### Benjamin C. WALLER, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 7630.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

March 9, 1937.

*1022Charles F. Hemans and Miles N. Culehan, both of Detroit, Mich., for appellant.

John C. Lehr, U. S. Atty., of Detroit, Mich.

Before MOORMAN, SIMONS, and ALLEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant being the person named in the indictment under which the removal proceedings were instituted, and it appearing from the proofs offered on the application for the writ of habeas corpus that there was probable cause to believe that the appellant had committed the offenses charged in the indictment, it is ordered that the order vacating the writ of habeas corpus and dismissing the petition therefor be affirmed.
astra_ex102.htm

EXHIBIT 10.2
  
  
  
 	 
	1
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	2
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	3
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	4
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	5
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	6
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	7
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	8
	

	 

  
  
  
   
 	 
	9
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	10
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	11
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	12
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	13
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	14
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	15
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	16
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	17
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	  18
Skip Navigation

#         Archive-It      

Login

      - HOME
      - EXPLORE
      - LEARN MORE
      - CONTACT US

### The leading web archiving service for collecting and accessing cultural heritage on the web 

Built at the Internet Archive

        - Explore
        - U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
        - News Releases

#  News Releases 

**Collected by:** U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

**Archived since:**Sep, 2013

**Description:**
This collection includes HHS news and announcements from 1991+.

**Subject:**    	    Government - US Federal,     	    Science & Health

**Creator:**    	    OS/ASPA

## Narrow Your Results

**Creator**

Sort By:
- Count
- (A-Z)
              - HHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (ASPA) (1)

**Categories**

Sort By:
- Count
- (A-Z)
              - Mental Health and Substance Abuse (1)

**Group**

Sort By:
- Count
- (A-Z)
              - HHS News Releases (1)

Sites for this collection are listed below. Narrow your results at left, or enter a search query below to		      find a site, specific URL or to search the text of archived webpages.
Clear
            - Date :  2015           X        
            - Date :  2015           X        
            - HHS_Official :  Richard G. Frank           X        

              - Sites
              - Search Page Text

Page 1 of 1  (1 Total Results)

**Sort By:**
                - Title (A-Z)
                - Title (Z-A)
                - URL (A-Z)
                - URL (Z-A)

### 	  Title:       Opioid epidemic: Medication-Assisted Treatment need significantly exceeds capacity    	  

### URL:     https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2015/06/11/opioid-epidemic-medication-assisted-treatment-need-significantly-exceeds-capacity.html

**Description:**	  	A new study published today in the American Journal of Public Health indicates that increased access to methadone or buprenorphine-based medication-assisted treatment (MAT) is critical to fully address the epidemic of opioid abuse and dependence in the United States.	  

	  	Loading Wayback Capture Info...	  

Loading video data...

**Creator:**    	    HHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (ASPA)

**Date:**        	2015        

**Group:**    	    HHS News Releases

**Categories:**    	    Mental Health and Substance Abuse

**HHS Official:**        	Richard G. Frank        

Page 1 of 1  (1 Total Results)

Archive It

#### Archive-It 

*Built at the Internet Archive*
2014 Archive-ItThe leading web archiving service for collecting and accessing  cultural heritage on the web 

      - Home
      - Learn More         - About Archive-It
        - News/Press
        - Meet the Team
        - Publications
      - Contact Us
#### Matthew SMITH, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 44460.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 15, 1974.

Rehearing Denied March 14, 1974.

Certiorari denied. 282 So.2d 683.

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

McCAIN, J., dissents.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-4587

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ROBERT H. BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge.

(CR-99-47)

Submitted: December 19, 2001 Decided: January 15, 2002

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Audrey Freeman jaCobs, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Paul J.

McNulty, United States Attorney, Stephen W. Miller, Assistant

United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Robert H. Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s order

resentencing him for his violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) (1994),

following a remand from this court. See United States v. Brown, 6

F. App. 159, 161 (4th Cir. 2001). We dismiss the appeal for lack

of jurisdiction because Brown’s notice of appeal was not timely

filed.

Parties to a criminal proceeding are accorded ten days after

entry of the district court’s final judgment to note an appeal, see

Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4). This appeal period is

“mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)).

The district court’s judgment was entered on the docket on

July 18, 2001. Brown’s notice of appeal was filed on July 31,

2001. Because Brown failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to

obtain an extension of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal.

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.

DISMISSED