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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          12,414
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,414
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  12,414
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,705,814
<OTHER-SE>                                     132,440
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       122
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 58 (Monday, March 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 17570]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7082]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Notice 2011-87

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of the Treasury published a document in the 
Federal Register on February 9, 2012, inviting comments on a proposed 
and/or continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). 
This document contained incorrect references.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of February 9, 2011, in FR Doc. 2012-2980, 
make the following corrections:
    <bullet> Page 6858, in the third column, under SUMMARY:, replace 
``Alabama'' with ``New York''.
    <bullet> Page 6858, in the third column, under SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORAMTION:, Title: replace ``Alabama'' with ``New York''.
    <bullet> Page 6859, in the first column, fourth line of text 
beginning with ``caused by'', replace ``caused by severe storms, 
tornadoes, straight-line winds and flooding in Alabama beginning on 
April 15, 2011.'' with ``in the State of New York caused by either 
Hurricane Irene during the period of August 26, 2011, to September 5, 
2011, or the remnants of Tropical Storm Lee during the period of 
September 7, 2011, to September 11, 2011.''
    <bullet> Page 6859, in the first column, under Estimated Number of 
Respondents:, replace ``600'' with ``1,200''.
    <bullet> Page 6859, in the first column, under Estimated Total 
Annual Burden Hours:, replace ``150'' with ``300''.

    Dated: March 20, 2012.
Dawn D. Wolfgang,
Treasury PRA Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-7082 Filed 3-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
#### Henry Millard McINTYRE, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

No. 86-1199.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Feb. 12, 1987.

*99Theodore N. Taylor, Plant City, for appellant/cross-appellee.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Belle B. Turner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee/cross-appellant.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction and a cross-appeal from a sentence in a criminal case. We affirm the conviction but quash the sentence.

Appellant alleged in his motion to dismiss, filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4), that he was a passenger in a car which contained cocaine. Appellant said he was with two others in the car and that he had no knowledge of the existence of the drug and no control over it. The state denied his assertions by filing a traverse to the motion to dismiss. Thus a factual dispute existed at that time — the state said he did and the defendant said he didn’t. A trial is where disputed issues of fact are determined. Appellant chose not to go to trial, but to plead nolo contendere. By this plea he neither admits nor denies the state’s allegations and submits himself to the court for disposition. The court found him guilty and sentenced him to two years probation.

A crime was alleged by the state. The state proved at least joint possession of the cocaine. The defendant was properly found guilty and convicted. His mere assertion that he knew nothing of the cocaine and had no control over it is not sufficient to require the trial court to find him not guilty. If the state properly traverses a 3.190(c)(4) motion then the trial judge cannot dismiss the case. Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.190(d). There is no issue raised here regarding the legal sufficiency of the traverse so no error in that regard is before us.

Cross-appellant, upon receiving the brief of appellant which contains in its appendix a copy of appellant’s rap sheet, filed a cross-appeal raising the issue of appellant’s sentence. It is apparent from this rap sheet that the two-years probation given appellant was a downward departure from the sentencing guidelines recommended sentence. No scoresheet is in the record so we quash the sentence and remand for resentencing under the guidelines. *Gage v. State,*461 So.2d 202 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), *approved,*480 So.2d 1291 (Fla.1985). If the court intends to depart then the reasons must be in writing in order to permit review to determine the legality of any departure.

Conviction AFFIRMED; Sentence QUASHED.

UPCHURCH, C.J., and SHARP, J., concur.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Surface Transportation Board

          - [Docket No. EP 290 (Sub-No. 5) (2012-2)]

# AGENCY:

Surface Transportation Board, Department of Transportation.

# ACTION:

Approval of rail cost adjustment factor.

      ( print page 17122)    

# SUMMARY:

The Board has approved the second quarter 2012 rail cost adjustment factor (RCAF) and cost index filed by the Association of American Railroads. The second quarter 2012 RCAF (Unadjusted) is 1.185. The second quarter 2012 RCAF (Adjusted) is 0.520. The second quarter 2012 RCAF-5 is 0.492.

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         April 1, 2012.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Pedro Ramirez, (202) 245-0333. Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) for the hearing impaired: (800) 877-8339.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Additional information is contained in the Board's decision, which is available on our Web site,                     *http://www.stb.dot.gov.*                     Copies of the decision may be purchased by contacting the Office of Public Assistance, Governmental Affairs, and Compliance at (202) 245-0238. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through FIRS at (800) 877-8339.                

This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or energy conservation.

Decided: March 19, 2012.

By the Board, Chairman Elliott, Vice Chairman Mulvey, and Commissioner Begeman.

Jeffrey Herzig,

Clearance Clerk.

[FR Doc. 2012-7048 Filed 3-22-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |   |                                                                                                                         |
|--------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |   |                                                                                                                         |
|   |   |   |                                                                                                                         |
|   |   |   | /s/ Mark                M. Laisure                                                                                           |
|        |   |   | Mark                M. Laisure                                                                                               |
|   |   |   | Chairman                  of the                  Board, Chief Executive Officerand                  Chief Financial Officer |
|   |   |   | June 14,                2006                                                                                            |

----
#### Daniel K. HEALEY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 87-810.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 28, 1987.

Daniel K. Healey, in pro. per.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, NESBITT and JORGENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See*Rule 3.850 Florida Rules Criminal Procedure; *see also in re Rule 3.850 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure,*481 So.2d 480 (Fla.1985); *The Florida Bar Re Amendment to Rules of*
      *62
      *Criminal Procedure*(Rule 3.850), 460 So.2d 907 (Fla.1984).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           2,865
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       83
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,442
<PP&E>                                           1,742
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,356
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,277
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,136
<BONDS>                                             34
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,099
<OTHER-SE>                                     (9,992)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,277
<SALES>                                            683
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   683
<CGS>                                              982
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,790
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (141)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,966)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,966)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,966)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.98)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 12930-002, Project No. 14080-000]

                    The Commission has received two preliminary permit applications deemed filed on February 1, 2011, at 8:30 a.m.,[1]                                          for proposed projects to be located on the Mississippi River, in Tunica County, Mississippi, and Lee County, Arkansas. The applications were filed by FFP Project 41, LLC for Project No. 12930-002, and Northland Power Mississippi River LLC for Project No. 14080-000.                

                    On January 17, 2012, at 9 a.m. (eastern time), the Secretary of the Commission, or her designee, will conduct a random drawing to determine the filing priority of the applicants identified in this notice. The Commission will select among competing permit applications as provided in section 4.37 of its regulations.[2]                                          The priority established by this drawing will be used to determine which applicant, among those with identical filing times, will be considered to have the first-filed application.                

The drawing is open to the public and will be held in room 2C, the Commission Meeting Room, located at 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426. A subsequent notice will be issued by the Secretary announcing the results of the drawing.

      ( print page 2290)    
Dated: January 10, 2012.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,

Deputy Secretary.

# Footnotes

1.                             Under the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, any document received after regular business hours is considered filed at 8:30 a.m. on the next regular business day. 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(2) (2011).                    
        Back to Citation      

2.                             18 CFR 4.37 (2011).                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2012-699 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
S. Con. Res. 156 Agreed to October 30, 2000

One Hundred Sixth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,

the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

Concurrent Resolution

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That in the enrollment of the bill (S. 1474) entitled ‘‘An

Act providing for conveyance of the Palmetto Bend project to the

State of Texas.’’, the Secretary of the Senate shall make the following correction:

In section 7(a) insert ‘‘not’’ after ‘‘shall’’.

Attest:

Secretary of the Senate.

Attest:

Clerk of the House of Representatives.
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 Provision Holding, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Curt Thornton,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, certify that, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. section 1350 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.








Dated: 
      June 5, 2008
            By:
            /s/
      Curt ThorntonCurt
      Thornton
              Chief
      Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and Chief Financial
      Officer (Principal Financial Officer and Accounting Officer) and
      Director
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-15-00213-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.J.R., a Child

From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014EM501263

The Honorable Nick Catoe Jr., Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 22, 2015

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

Appellant, who is pro se, appeals a trial court order in a suit affecting the parent-child 

relationship that was signed August 11, 2014. Appellant did not timely file a motion that would 

have extended the appellate timetable. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 329b(g); TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). Thus, 

the notice of appeal was due September 10, 2014, or a motion for extension of time to file the 

notice of appeal was due fifteen days later on September 25, 2014. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1, 26.3. 

Appellant did not file a timely notice of appeal or a motion for extension of time to file the notice 

of appeal. However, on April 10, 2015, appellant filed a notice of appeal. 

A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good 

faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Rule 26.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure, but within the fifteen-day grace period provided by Rule 26.3 for filing a motion for 
04-15-00213-CV

- 2 -

extension of time. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 615 (1997) (construing predecessor 

to Rule 26). But “once the period for granting a motion for extension of time under Rule [26.3] 

has passed, a party can no longer invoke the appellate court’s jurisdiction.” Id.

On June 4, 2015, we ordered appellant to file, on or before, July 6, 2015, a response 

showing cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. We advised 

appellant that if he failed to satisfactorily respond within the time provided, the appeal would be 

dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a), (c). Appellant did not timely file a response. 

Appellant’s notice of appeal was untimely, and the period for granting appellant an 

extension of time to file his notice passed before he ultimately filed his notice of appeal in April 

2015. Accordingly, appellant cannot invoke our jurisdiction, and we dismiss the appeal for want 

of jurisdiction. 

PER CURIAM
Exhibit
        32.1
  CERTIFICATIONS
        OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 UNDER
        SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  In
        connection with the filing by Lixte Biotechnology Holdings, Inc. (the
“Registrant”) of its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
        ended June 30, 2008 (the “Quarterly Report”) with the Securities and Exchange
        Commission, I, John S. Kovach, 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
        Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
        Registrant.
  A
        signed
        original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
        to
        the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the
        Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
  Date:
                  August 12, 2008
              By:
              /s/
                  JOHN S. KOVACHJohn
                  S. KovachChief
                  Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer(Principal
                  Executive Officer and Principal Financial
                  Officer)
#### Larry CALLAHAN, Appellant, v. PIZZA HUT OF AMERICA, INC., Appellee.

No. BS-48.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Jan. 15, 1988.

Michael E. Lewis of Law Offices of Gary, Williams and Parenti, Stuart, for appellant.

John J. Schickel and Daniel C. Shaugh-nessy of Coker, Meyers *&*Schickel, Jacksonville, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Larry Callahan appeals the trial court’s order dismissing his fourth amended complaint with prejudice. We find the allegations of the fourth amended complaint are sufficient to state a cause of action. *See Paterson v. Deeb,*472 So.2d 1210 (Fla. 1st *465DCA 1985), *review denied,*484 So.2d 8 (Fla.1986).

Accordingly, the trial court’s order of dismissal is reversed, and this cause is remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

ERVIN, JOANOS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.