alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1684 

To require a pilot program on the provision of certain information to State 

veterans agencies to facilitate the transition of members of the Armed 

Forces from military service to civilian life. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 12, 2013 

Mr. TOOMEY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To require a pilot program on the provision of certain information to State veterans agencies to facilitate the transition of members of the Armed Forces from military 

service to civilian life. 

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 ‘‘Servicemembers Tran5 sition Improvement Act of 2013’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1684 IS

1 SEC. 2. PILOT PROGRAM ON PROVISION OF CERTAIN IN2 FORMATION TO STATE VETERANS AGENCIES 

3 TO FACILITATE THE TRANSITION OF MEM4 BERS OF THE ARMED FORCES FROM MILI5 TARY SERVICE TO CIVILIAN LIFE. 

6 (a) PILOT PROGRAM REQUIRED.—Commencing not 

7 later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this 

8 Act, the Secretary of Defense shall carry out a pilot pro9 gram to assess the feasibility and advisability of providing 

10 the information described in subsection (b) on members 

11 of the Armed Forces who are separating from the Armed 

12 Forces to State veterans agencies as a means of facili13 tating the transition of members of the Armed Forces 

14 from military service to civilian life. 

15 (b) COVERED INFORMATION.—The information de16 scribed in this subsection with respect to a member is as 

17 follows: 

18 (1) Department of Defense Form DD 214. 

19 (2) A personal email address. 

20 (3) A personal telephone number. 

21 (4) A mailing address. 

22 (c) VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION.—The participation 

23 of a member in the pilot program shall be at the election 

24 of the member. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1684 IS

1 (d) FORM OF PROVISION OF INFORMATION.—Infor2 mation shall be provided to State veterans agencies under 

3 the pilot program in digitized electronic form. 

4 (e) USE OF INFORMATION.—Information provided to 

5 State veterans agencies under the pilot program may be 

6 shared by such agencies with appropriate county veterans 

7 service offices in such manner and for such purposes as 

8 the Secretary shall specify for purposes of the pilot pro9 gram. 

10 (f) REPORT.—Not later than 15 months after the 

11 date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall sub12 mit to Congress a report on the pilot program. The report 

13 shall include a description of the pilot program and such 

14 recommendations, including recommendations for con15 tinuing or expanding the pilot program, as the Secretary 

16 considers appropriate in light of the pilot program. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32





CERTIFICATION
BY CEO AND CFO PURSUANT


TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT


CERTIFICATION




The
undersigned hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2008 of BNL FINANCIAL CORPORATION (the “Company”)
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.





Date:  March
30,
2009                                                          /s/ Wayne E.
Ahart


Name:  Wayne E.
AhartTitles:Chairman of the Board of Directors


and Chief Executive
Officer


BNL
FINANCIAL CORPORATION




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 BNL FINANCIAL CORPORATION and
will be retained by BNL FINANCIAL CORPORATION and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





This
Certification is not “filed” for the purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act
or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.  This
Certification is not incorporated by reference into any filing under the
Securities Act or the Exchange Act.







Date:  March
30,
2009 /s/ Barry N.
Shamas


Name: Barry N.
Shamas


Titles: Executive Vice
President,


Chief
Operating Officer andChief Financial Officer


BNL
FINANCIAL CORPORATION
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                       UNION PACIFIC RESOURCES GROUP INC.

                        COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                              (Shares in Thousands)
                                   (Unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                          Six Months Ended
                                                                               June 30,
                                                                      ---------------------------
                                                                          1998            1997
                                                                      -----------     -----------
<S>                                                                   <C>             <C>
Basic weighted average number of shares outstanding .............         247,637         250,128

Dilutive weighted average shares issuable on exercise of stock
     options less shares repurchasable from proceeds ............             551             876
                                                                      -----------     -----------

Diluted weighted average number of common and common
     equivalent shares ..........................................         248,188         251,004
                                                                      ===========     ===========



Net income (millions) ...........................................     $      13.9     $     191.6
                                                                      ===========     ===========


Earnings per share - basic ......................................     $      0.06     $      0.77
                                                                      ===========     ===========
Earnings per share - diluted ....................................     $      0.06     $      0.76
                                                                      ===========     ===========
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE>                     UT

<LEGEND>                      The schedule contains summary financial
                              information extracted from Consolidated
                              Balance Sheet, Income Statement and Statement of
                              Cash Flows for Orange and Rockland Utilities,
                              Inc. and is qualified in its entirety
                              by reference to such financial statements
                              and the notes thereto.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>  0000074778
<NAME> Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                         1,000

<S>                               <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 Dec-31-1999

<PERIOD-END>                      Dec-31-1999

<PERIOD-TYPE>                     12-Mos

<BOOK-VALUE>                      Per-Book

<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>         699,122

<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>       3,421

<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>            237,293

<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>          141,703

<OTHER-ASSETS>                    7,237

<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    1,088,776

<COMMON>                          5

<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>         354,772

<RETAINED-EARNINGS>               (22,763)

<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>    332,014

<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0

<PREFERRED>                            0

<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>              281,524

<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                     0

<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>              0

<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>         0

<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>     120,000

<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>              0

<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>            0

<LEASES-CURRENT>                       0

<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>    355,238

<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>     1,088,776

<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>         617,494

<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>              3,717

<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>        588,493

<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>        592,210

<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>           25,284

<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                22,076

<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>    47,360

<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>          32,635

<NET-INCOME>                      14,725

<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>       886

<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>     13,839

<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>          17,447

<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>         27,534

<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>            81,170

<EPS-BASIC>                          0

<EPS-DILUTED>                          0


</TABLE>
Table 10.  Percent Distribution by Type of Unit for the United States and 
                  for Inside and Outside MAs:  First Quarter 1999 and 1998

(Percent distribution may not add to total, due to rounding)



                                                     First quarter 1999
Type of housing unit
                                              United   Inside     Outside
                                              States     MAs        MAs

All housing units.........................       100        100        100

    Year-round vacant.....................       9.2        8.5       11.6
      For rent............................       2.6        2.8        2.0
      For sale only.......................       1.1        1.1        1.2
      Rented or sold, awaiting occupancy..       0.7        0.7        0.6
      Held off market.....................       4.8        3.9        7.8
        For occasional use................       1.7        1.2        3.3
        Temporarily occupied by persons
        with usual residence elsewhere....       0.8        0.8        0.8
        For other reasons.................       2.3        1.9        3.7

    Seasonal vacant.......................       2.6        1.4        7.1

    Occupied..............................      88.2       90.1       81.2



                                                     First quarter 1998
Type of housing unit
                                              United   Inside     Outside
                                              States     MAs        MAs

All housing units.........................       100        100        100

    Year-round vacant.....................       8.9        8.3       10.9
      For rent............................       2.5        2.7        2.1
      For sale only.......................       1.0        1.0        1.2
      Rented or sold, awaiting occupancy..       0.7        0.8        0.6
      Held off market.....................       4.6        3.9        7.0
        For occasional use................       1.5        1.1        2.7
        Temporarily occupied by persons
        with usual residence elsewhere....       0.8        0.8        0.9
        For other reasons.................       2.3        2.0        3.4

    Seasonal vacant.......................       2.8        1.6        7.5

    Occupied..............................      88.3       90.1       81.6
1 

### Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:14 AM

To: 'jmagers76@yahoo.com'

Cc: '333exemptions@faa.gov' Subject: Petition for Exemption: X 12 Production Services, LLP



### May 20, 2015

Dear Mr. Magers:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2014-1038). This information is necessary for the Fe deral Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

 Describe the aircraft make, mode l, and type (i.e. - fixed-wing, ro torcraft, lighter-than-air) for the proposed UAS operation. The description shoul d include the maximum weight (including payload). This information can be located in the aircraft manual.

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Hea dquarters or electronically via e-mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov . If you want us to process your request a ny further, we must receive the information described above by June 3, 2015. If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

Nia Daniels Program Analyst

Nia Daniels, ARM

‐ 108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075 nia.daniels@faa.gov
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                   CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT


         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, the undersigned, Charles E. Johnson, the
chief executive officer of Transpro, Inc. (the "issuer"), does hereby certify
that the report on Form 10-Q accompanying this certification (the "report")
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in
the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the issuer.



/s/ Charles E. Johnson
----------------------
Charles E. Johnson
President and Chief Executive Officer
(chief executive officer)
Transpro, Inc.
May 11, 2004



                                       21
#### Wanda CARROLL, individually, and Orlando Radio & Television Broadcasting Corporation, d/b/a Radio Stations WORL & WORJ-FM, a Florida corporation, Appellants, v. EVERBACH BROADCASTING COMPANY, INC., d/b/a Radio Staion WOKB, a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 72-724.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 16, 1972.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Orange County; Parker Lee McDonald, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
Table 5.  Homeownership Rates for the United States:  1965 to 2007

          (in percent)

   Year     First    Second     Third     Fourth

           Quarter   Quarter   Quarter   Quarter



2007....        68.4      68.2

2006....        68.5      68.7      69.0      68.9

2005....        69.1      68.6      68.8      69.0

2004....        68.6      69.2      69.0      69.2

2003....        68.0      68.0      68.4      68.6

2002\r..        67.8      67.6      68.0      68.3

2002....        67.8      67.6      68.0      68.3

2001....        67.5      67.7      68.1      68.0

2000....        67.1      67.2      67.7      67.5



1999....        66.7      66.6      67.0      66.9

1998....        65.9      66.0      66.8      66.4

1997....        65.4      65.7      66.0      65.7

1996....        65.1      65.4      65.6      65.4

1995....        64.2      64.7      65.0      65.1

1994....        63.8      63.8      64.1      64.2

1993\r..        63.7      63.9      64.2      64.2

1993....        64.2      64.4      64.7      64.6

1992....        64.0      63.9      64.3      64.4

1991....        63.9      63.9      64.2      64.2

1990....        64.0      63.7      64.0      64.1

1989\r..        63.9      63.8      64.1      63.8 



1989....        63.9      63.9      64.0      63.8

1988....        63.7      63.7      64.0      63.8

1987....        63.8      63.8      64.2      64.1

1986....        63.6      63.8      63.8      63.9

1985....        64.1      64.1      63.9      63.5

1984....        64.6      64.6      64.6      64.1

1983....        64.7      64.7      64.8      64.4

1982....        64.8      64.9      64.9      64.5

1981....        65.6      65.3      65.6      65.2

1980....        65.5      65.5      65.8      65.5

1979\r..        64.8      64.9      65.8      65.4



1979....        65.3      65.1      66.0      65.8

1978....        64.8      64.4      65.2      65.4

1977....        64.8      64.5      65.0      64.9

1976....        64.6      64.6      64.9      64.8

1975....        64.4      64.9      64.6      64.5

1974....        64.8      64.8      64.6      64.4

1973....        64.9      64.4      64.4      64.4

1972....        64.3      64.5      64.3      64.4

1971....        64.0      64.1      64.4      64.5

1970....        64.3      64.0      64.4      64.0

1969....        64.1      64.4      64.4      64.4

1968....        63.6      64.1      64.1      63.6

1967....        63.3      63.9      63.8      63.5

1966....        63.5      63.2      63.3      63.8

1965....        62.9      62.9      62.9      63.4

\r Revised.
#### Michael John DALY and Audrey Ann Daly, his wife, Appellants, v. Harold J. HENDRIX and Frances Ellison Hendrix, his wife, et al., Appellees.

No. 71-666.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 22, 1971.

Appeal dismissed.
Order filed January 5, 201 7

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 16

- 00785

- CV

____________ WOODS MFI, LLC , Appellant

V. PLAINSCAPITAL BANK, Appellee

On Appeal from the 129th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2016

- 01321



### O R D E R This is an appeal from a judgment signed June 21, 2016. Appellant tim ely filed a post judgment motion. The notice of appeal was due September 19, 2016. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1. Appellant, however, filed its notice of appeal on September 28, 2016, a date within 15 days of the due date for the notice of appeal. A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when the perfecting instrument is filed
within 15 days of its due date. Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). Appellant did not file a motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal. While an2

exte nsion may be implied, appellant is still obligated to come forward with a reasonable explanation to support the late filing. See Miller v. Greenpark Surgery Center Assocs., Ltd. , 974 S.W.2d 805, 808 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, no pet.).
Accordi ngly, we ORDER appellant to file a proper motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal by January 15, 201 7

. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3;10.5(b). If appellant does not comply with this order, we will dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3.

PER CUR IAM
#### In re ESTATE of Samuel BUCHMAN, Deceased. The Law Firm of TURNER, HENDRICK, GUILFORD, GOLDSTEIN & McDONALD, Appellant, v. The ESTATE of Samuel BUCHMAN, Deceased, Appellee.

No. 72-499.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 12, 1972.

*385Turner, Hendrick, Guilford, Goldstein & McDonald and S. Alan Stanley, Coral Gables, for appellant.

Joseph Pardo, Miami, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and PEARSON and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the Law Firm of Turner, Hendrick, Guilford, Goldstein and McDonald from an order of the lower court which granted appellant attorneys’ fees for its work during the probate of the estate of Samuel Buchman. A letter agreement written by appellant was reached between the law firm and the co-executors of the estate in which a fee of Three Thousand Dollars was established to represent the “total sum that would be charged for the completion of the estate”. It is urged on appeal that the fee in the letter agreement related only to ordinary and reasonable services as opposed to extraordinary services and that the lower court erred by not taking this into consideration in holding appellant to the terms of this agreement. The record on appeal reveals that the trial judge made a proper award for attorneys’ fees pursuant to the agreement under which appellant was obligated. Although appellant may have been entitled to a larger award the agreement limits the fee charged and appellant is thereby bound by its terms. *7*Fla.Jur. Contracts 8 2 (1956).

In an additional point raised on appeal it is alleged that the trial court erred in considering the question of attorneys’ fees solely by affidavit and thereby denying appellant the opportunity to present oral testimony with regards to this ques-ton. We find that no error was committed since appellant agreed to this procedure; however, the question is moot because appellant is bound by its written agreement on the amount to be charged for attorneys’ fees.

Accordingly, the lower court’s order allowing attorneys’ fees is affirmed.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.2.2



Certification Required Under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, Joan S. Freilich, the Chief Financial Officer of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (the Company) certify that the
Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, which this statement accompanies, (the Form 10-K) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/    Joan S. FreilichJoan S. Freilich




Dated: February 24, 2005
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

 
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated February 6,
1998 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Cox Communications, Inc.
for the year ended December 31, 1997, in the following Registration Statements
of Cox Communications, Inc. and to the reference to us under the heading
"Experts" in the Registration Statements on Form S-3:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                  FORM                  FILE NO.
           ------------------      -------------------
 
           <S>                     <C>
                  S-8                         33-80993
                  S-8                         33-80995
                  S-8                         33-91506
                  S-8                         33-93148
                  S-8                        333-44399
                  S-3                        333-03351
                  S-3                        333-03766
</TABLE>



/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
March 17, 1998
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 6, 2014

No. 04-14-00312-CR

IN RE Juan Carlos VALLES

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

On May 1, 2014, relator filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus. This court has 

determined that we lack jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. The petition for writ of 

mandamus is DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. The court’s opinion will issue at a 

later date.

It is so ORDERED on May 6th, 2014.

_____________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

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

court on this 6th day of May, 2014.

_____________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 12-03-00119-CRL, styled The State of Texas v. Juan Carlos Valles, 

pending in the 81st Judicial District Court, La Salle County, Texas, the Honorable Donna S. Rayes presiding.