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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       2,049,022
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               18,005,774
<ALLOWANCES>                                   244,866
<INVENTORY>                                 13,779,015
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            37,356,041
<PP&E>                                      63,098,241
<DEPRECIATION>                              36,202,495
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              68,882,543
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       15,017,333
<BONDS>                                     15,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,407,841
<OTHER-SE>                                  25,855,292
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                68,882,543
<SALES>                                    122,358,592
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           122,358,592
<CGS>                                       64,006,688
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              115,388,160
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               922,884
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               128,006
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,194,986
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              6,047,548
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,592,935
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,454,613
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,454,613
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    28.43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    28.43



</TABLE>
#### Nancy L. KIESLING, Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION of the State of Colorado (Ex-Officio Unemployment Compensation Commission of Colorado), and Colorado Division of Employment and Training, Respondents.

No. 79CA1147.

Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. II.

Aug. 21, 1980.

William E. Benjamin, Commerce City, for petitioner.

J. D. MacFarlane, Atty. Gen., Richard F. Hennessey, Deputy Atty. Gen., Mary J. Mullarkey, Sol. Gen., Molly Sommerville, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for respondents.

ENOCH, Chief Judge.

Claimant, Nancy L. Riesling, seeks review of an order of the Industrial Commission which reduced her unemployment compensation benefits for a period of 16 weeks pursuant to § 8-73-108(5), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum.Supp.). We affirm.

Claimant contends that the Commission’s decision was erroneous as a matter of law because it failed to specify a particular subsection of § 8-73-108(5), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum.Supp.), which would justify a reduced award.

The Commission, in affirming the referee’s determination on the basis of evidence it considered competent, in effect adopted the referee’s finding on such “pertinent factors” as the claimant’s absenteeism, tardiness, and poor attitude and the employer’s dissatisfaction with her work. Given these circumstances, a reduced award was justified under § 8-73-108(5)(x), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum.Supp.).1 Thus, we perceive no abuse of discretion in the Commission’s order, despite the fact that the statutory subsection was not expressly cited. *See*
      *1003
      *Anyon v. Industrial Commission,*42 Colo.App. 88, 589 P.2d 1390 (1979).

Contrary to the assertion of the parties, *Albaitis v. Industrial Commission,*Colo. App., 609 P.2d 1118 (1980) (cert, granted, April 21, 1980), is not directly in point on this issue. In that case the reasons relied on by the Commission for reduction of benefits were not among the 23 situations listed in § 8-73-108(5), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum. Supp.), whereas in this case the reasons relied on are covered by subsection (5)(x).

Claimant also contends that the Commission erred in upholding the referee’s decision to reduce her benefits for 16 weeks, whereas the deputy whose decision she appealed disqualified her for only a 12-week period. She maintains that the length of the period of disqualification was not one of the issues raised at the hearing on her appeal and that the referee exceeded his statutory authority and violated her right to due process of law in increasing the penalty period. *Armijo*v. *Industrial Commission,*Colo.App., 610 P.2d 107 (1980) is dispositive of this contention.

Order affirmed.

PIERCE and VAN CISE, JJ., concur.

. Although § 8-73-108(5)(x), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum.Supp.), did not govern the referee’s determination, it was applicable at the time of the Commission’s final order in December of 1979. Colo.Sess. Laws 1979, ch. 67, § 25 at 356.
| (1)   | the                Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Secured Diversified Investment, Ltd.                for                the year ended December 31, 2006 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 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the                year                ended December 31, 2006, fairly presents in all material respects,                the                financial condition and results of operations of Secured Diversified                Investment, Ltd.. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  By: |  /s/                Jan Wallace                    |
|-----------|---------------------------------------------------------|
| Name:     | Jan                Wallace                              |
| Title:    | Principal                Executive Officer and Director |
| Date:     | May                18, 2007                             |
|  By: |  /s/                Munjit Johal                   |
| Name:     | Munjit                Johal                             |
| Title:    | Principal                Financial Officer              |
| Date:     | May                18, 2007                             |
SCAQMD Governing Clean Fuels/ Other Federal EP

Account Description Actual Interest Lobbyist Board Title 

V Mobile Srcs Drawdowns B

Personnel 65,886,490 $ 0 $ (259,246) $ 0 $ 0 $ (1,038,389) $ 64,5

 

Fringe Benefits 35,125,609 0 (22,302) 0 0 (534,823) 34,5

 

Travel 291,460 (59,356.49) (39,219) 0 0 (1,627) 1

 

Supplies 2,709,636 (335) (4,086) 0 0 (223,204) 2,4

 

Contracts 13,409,278 (784,256) (453,998) 0 0 (180,932) 11,9

 

Other 4,233,527 (836) (142,230) 0 0 (974,004) 3,1

 

Principal Repayment 3,159,384 0 0 0 0 0 3,1

 

Interest 4,031,995 (4,031,995) 0 0 0 0 0 

 

Prior Year Expense 1,116,103 0 0 0 0 0 1,1

 

Uncollectible Accts (43,451) 0 0 0 0 0 (

 

Equipment 3,684,799 0 0 0 0 (188,965) 3,4

 

Title V Activities (6,3

(6,329,230) 

CF/MS Activities (3,1

(3,176,394) 

FY 14 ACTUAL $133,604,829EXEMPTIONS (4,031,995) (844,783) (921,081) (6,329,230) (3,176,394) (3,141,944) 

TOTAL FY14 105 ADJUSTED GRANT ACTUALS $ 115,1

FY 14 Actu

$ 115,1

(4,9

110,2

(3,9

$ 106,3

FY 13 Actu

$ 118,4

(5,0

113,4

(8,3

$ 105,0

FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR-14 GRANT FINANCIAL STATUS REPORT WORKSHEET

12/24/2014 - 12:59 PMMKL
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT N OT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED W ILLIAM ARTHUR WALSH , A ppellant ,
v. Case No. 5D 22

- 2298 LT Case No. 2018

- CA

- 00704 STAT E OF FLORIDA ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Decision filed May 2, 2023 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Flagler County , Terence R. P erkins, Judge. Matthew J. Metz , Public Defender, and Teresa D. Sutton, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley Moody , Attorney General, Tallahassee, a nd Douglas T. Squire, Assistant Attorney General, D aytona Bea ch, f or Appellee.

PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. LAMBERT, C .J., MAKAR and KILBANE , JJ

. , concur.
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 
 FORM 10-Q/A
 (Amendment No. 1)
 þ
    
    QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2006
 or
 o
    
    TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the Transition Period from  to
 Commission file number 000-50891
 SPECIALTY UNDERWRITERS ALLIANCE, INC.
  Delaware
    
    20-0432760(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or
    
    (I.R.S. Employer Identificationorganization)
    
    Number)222 South Riverside Plaza
Chicago, Illinois
    
    60606(Address of principal executive office)
    
    (Zip Code)
 (888) 782-4672
  þ o
  Large accelerated filer o
    
    Accelerated filer þ
    
    Non-accelerated filer o
 o þ




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  PART I  FINANCIAL INFORMATIONItem 4: Controls and ProceduresPART II  OTHER INFORMATIONItem 6: ExhibitsSIGNATURES302 Certification302 Certification    Table of Contents  EXPLANATORY NOTE
   
 PART I  FINANCIAL INFORMATION
 
 Item 4: Controls and Procedures
 Conclusion Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures.
  Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
 2




---



##### Table of Contents



Inherent Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls.
 
 PART II  OTHER INFORMATION
 
 Item 6: Exhibits
  ExhibitNumber
    
    Description10.1.1
    
    Amendment No. 2 to Partner Agent Program Agreement, dated March
20, 2006 between the Registrant and American Team Managers*31.1
    
    Certification of Courtney C. Smith pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**31.2
    
    Certification of Peter E. Jokiel pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**32.1
    
    Certification of Courtney C. Smith pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002*32.2
    
    Certification of Peter E. Jokiel Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002*
 
 *
    
    Previously filed as part of the Registrants Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006.**
    
    Submitted herewith. 3




---



##### Table of Contents



SPECIALTY UNDERWRITERS ALLIANCE, INC.(Registrant)Dated: June 16, 2006
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Courtney C. SmithName:
    
    Courtney C. SmithTitle:
    
    President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive Officer)Dated: June 16, 2006
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Peter E. JokielName:
    
    Peter E. JokielTitle:
    
    Executive Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer)
 4
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**   I, E. Eugene Sharer., Interim Chief Financial Officer of Airbee Wireless, Inc., certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Airbee Wireless, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  c. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s first fiscal quarter) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction): a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.   /s/ E. Eugene Sharer     E. Eugene Sharer  Interim Chief Financial Officer  September 20, 2005
| (1)   | the                  Amended Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A of Secured Diversified Investment,                  Ltd. for the year ended December 31, 2006 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 Amended Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A                  for                  the year ended December 31, 2006, fairly presents in all material                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of                  Secured                  Diversified Investment, Ltd.. |
|-----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  By: |  /s/                  Jan Wallace                    |
|-----------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
| Name:     | Jan                  Wallace                              |
| Title:    | Principal                  Executive Officer and Director |
| Date:     | June 11, 2007                                             |
|  By: |  /s/                  Munjit Johal                   |
| Name:     | Munjit                  Johal                             |
| Title:    | Principal                  Financial Officer              |
| Date:     | June 11,                    2007                          |
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6590

JAMES M. BIVENS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DAVID GARRAGHTY, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-99-226-7) Submitted: August 19, 1999 Decided: August 26, 1999Before WIDENER and KING, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James M. Bivens, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on April 2, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on April 5, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray , 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: James Bivens seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Bivens v. Garraghty, No. CA99-226-7 (W.D. Va. Apr. 5, 1999). * 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
H. J. Res. 46 

One Hundred Sixteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and nineteen 

Joint Resolution 

Relating to a national emergency declared by the President on February 15, 2019. 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That, pursuant 

to section 202 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622), 

the national emergency declared by the finding of the President 

on February 15, 2019, in Proclamation 9844 (84 Fed. Reg. 4949) 

is hereby terminated. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
ACCEPTED

04-14-00913-CV

FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

4/14/2015 3:13:35 PM

KEITH HOTTLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 04/14/2015 3:13:35 PM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 115 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 115

To require the Department of State to establish a policy regarding the 
 use of location-tracking consumer devices by employees at diplomatic 
            and consular facilities, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2019

    Mr. Castro of Texas (for himself and Mr. McCaul) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the Department of State to establish a policy regarding the 
 use of location-tracking consumer devices by employees at diplomatic 
            and consular facilities, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting Diplomats from 
Surveillance Through Consumer Devices Act''.

SEC. 2. SECURING UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR FACILITIES 
              AGAINST CYBERSURVEILLANCE.

    (a) Policy on Location-Tracking Consumer Devices.--Not later than 
60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
State shall establish a policy on the use of location-tracking consumer 
devices, including GPS-enabled devices, at United States diplomatic and 
consular facilities by United States Government employees, contractors, 
locally employed staff, and members of other agencies deployed to or 
stationed at such facilities.
    (b) Security Briefing.--Existing and new employees at United States 
diplomatic and consular facilities, including contractors, locally 
employed staff, and members of other agencies deployed to or stationed 
at such facilities, shall, as a part of the security briefings provided 
to such employees, be informed of the policy described in subsection 
(a) and given instructions on the use of location-tracking consumer 
devices both on and off the premises of such facilities.
    (c) Coordination.--The Secretary of State shall coordinate with the 
heads of any other agencies whose employees are deployed to or 
stationed at United States diplomatic and consular facilities in the 
formulation of the policy described in subsection (a) and the 
dissemination of such policy pursuant to subsection (b).
    (d) Report.--Not later than 30 days after the formulation of the 
policy described in subsection (a), the Secretary of State shall submit 
to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and 
the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate a report on the 
details of such policy.
                                 <all>
```
EPA SANITIZED

Page 1 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 2 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 3 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 4 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 5 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 6 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 7 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 8 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 9 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 10 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 11 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 12 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 13 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 14 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 15 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 16 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 17 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 18 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 19 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 20 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 21 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 22 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 23 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 24 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 25 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 26 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 27 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 28 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 29 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 30 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 31 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 32 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 33 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 34 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 35 of 36
EPA SANITIZED

Page 36 of 36