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

<ARTICLE>           5
<MULTIPLIER>        1,000
       
<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                  DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                            10484
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     19194
<ALLOWANCES>                                      0
<INVENTORY>                                       15966
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  49520
<PP&E>                                            93609
<DEPRECIATION>                                    57522
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    86278
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              8438
<BONDS>                                           0
<COMMON>                                          10167
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                        53832
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      86278
<SALES>                                           127139
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  127139
<CGS>                                             95040
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     110177
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (1123)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                723
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   16909
<INCOME-TAX>                                      6249
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               10660
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                      10660
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      1.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      1.05

                                      
        


</TABLE>
**Exhibit
        32.2**
 
 **CERTIFICATION
        OF INTERIM PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**
 **PURSUANT
        TO RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)**
 **OF
        THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION
        1350**
 
 In
        connection with the Quarterly Report of Airbee Wireless, Inc. (the “Company”) on
        Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the
        Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, E.
        Eugene Sharer, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
        to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:
 
 (1)
        The
        Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
        the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 (2)
        The
        information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of the operations of the
        Company.
 
 /s/
        E.
        Eugene Sharer
 E.
        Eugene
        Sharer
 Interim
        Principal Financial Officer
 
 September
        18, 2008
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 23

- 00878

- CR

Ricardo DE LA O , Appellant

v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 399th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2023CR0309 Honorable Frank J. Castro , Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Irene Rios Justice Beth Watkins , Justice Delivered and Filed: November 22, 2023
DISMISSED On September 29, 2023, appellant Ricardo De La O II filed a “Notice of Appeal From Negotiated Plea.” After De La O filed his notice of appeal, the district clerk filed a copy of the clerk’s record showing De La O entered into a written plea bargain agreement with the State pursuant to which he pled nolo contendere to three counts of aggravated sexual assault. The clerk’s record further shows the trial court imposed a sentence in accordance with the agreement and signed a certification stating this “is a plea

- bargain case , and the defendant has NO right of appeal.”
See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(a)(2).04

- 23

- 00878

- CR

- 2

- “In a plea bargain case . . . a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal; or (C) where the specific appeal is expressly authori zed by statute.” Id. We must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” Id. R. 25.2(d). Here, the clerk’s record establishes the punishment assessed by the court does no t exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by De La O

. It also does not include a written motion filed and ruled upon before trial; nor does it indicate the trial court gave De La O permission to appeal. Thus, the record supports the trial court’s certification this is a plea

- bargain case and De La O does not have a right to appeal. See id. R. 25.2.; Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding court of appeals should review clerk ’ s record to determine whether t rial court ’ s certification is accurate). On October 6, 2023, we ordered De La O to file a response establishing an amended certification showing he has the right to appeal has been made part of the appellate record. We cautioned De La O failure to satis factorily respond to this order within the time provided would result in the dismissal of this appeal. On November 5, 2023, De La O’s counsel filed a response to our order agreeing De La O entered into a plea bargain with the State, the trial court impose d a sentence in accordance with the agreement, and the signed certificate stated De La O had no right of appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(d).

PER CURIAM Do Not Publish
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-2699

_____________________________

PAUL FRANK SMALL JR.,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County.

John F. Simon, Judge.

August 27, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, JAY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Paul Frank Small, Jr., pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Amanda D. Stokes, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 36

 38

 40

 42

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 2000

 1000

18 12 06 00

05/30

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 30 May 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.48 N 77.37 W Meters AGL
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                       1,734,261
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,427,988
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,263,144
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,825,174
<PP&E>                                      11,312,406
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,904,002
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,355,321
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,436,009
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        1,268,501
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       933,080
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,176,638
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,355,321
<SALES>                                     21,084,804
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            21,084,804
<CGS>                                       16,145,848
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               19,703,379
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (126,714)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,508,139
<INCOME-TAX>                                   575,953
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            932,186
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   932,186
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Paritosh K. Choksi, Executive Vice President of ATEL Financial Services, LLC, Managing Member ofATEL Capital Equipment Fund XI, LLC (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that: 1. The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September30, 2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and  2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.Date: November 22, 2005       /s/ Paritosh K. Choksi  Paritosh K. Choksi  Executive Vice President of Managing Member,Principal Financial Officer of Registrant   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.
21
IB 

Union Calendar No. 23 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1232 

[Report No. 116–45] 

To amend the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility 

Act of 1996 to repeal certain waiver authority relating to the construction 

of new border barriers, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 14, 2019 

Miss RICE of New York (for herself and Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 

MAY 2, 2019 

Additional sponsors: Ms. ESCOBAR, Ms. JACKSON LEE, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Ms. NORTON, Mr. LANGEVIN, and Ms. CLARKE

of New York 

MAY 2, 2019 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 

and ordered to be printed 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1232 RH

A BILL 

To amend the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant 

Responsibility Act of 1996 to repeal certain waiver authority relating to the construction of new border barriers, and for other purposes. 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1232 RH

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 ‘‘Rescinding DHS’ 

5 Waiver Authority for Border Wall Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF WAIVER AUTHORITY FOR THE CON7 STRUCTION OF NEW BORDER BARRIERS. 

8 Section 102 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and 

9 Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (division C of Pub10 lic Law 104–208; 8 U.S.C. 1103 note) is amended by 

11 striking subsection (c). 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 23 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1232 

[Report No. 116–45] 

A BILL 

To amend the Illegal Immigration Reform and Imof new border barriers, and for other purposes. tain waiver authority relating to the construction migrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to repeal cerMAY 2, 2019 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
#### Hugo C. Koch, Appellant, v Maurice Abelson et al., Respondents.

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert White, J.), entered January 12, 1990, which, *inter alia,*granted defendants partial summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s fifth cause of action for damages for slander, and order of the same Court, entered April 2, 1990, which denied renewal and/or reargument of the previous order, are both unanimously affirmed, with one bill of $250 costs and disbursements of these appeals.

*317Plaintiff alleges that defendant Abelson defamed him in front of a third person by stating that he would initiate an investigation concerning plaintiff’s murder of his mother. The IAS court properly dismissed this cause of action since plaintiff was unable to prove that the statement was published. *(See, Memory Gardens v D’Amico,*91 AD2d 1159.)

On his motion for renewal and/or reargument plaintiff provided the name of an individual who allegedly heard the slanderous statement, as well as excerpts of a tape recording. As there is no valid reason why the identity of this individual (who submitted an affidavit *denying*that he heard the statement) was not discovered and provided to the court in opposition to the summary judgment motion, or why the tape was not submitted earlier, renewal was properly denied *(see, Foley v Roche,*68 AD2d 558). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Asch and Rubin, JJ.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1


                           BRIDGFORD FOODS CORPORATION

                           SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT
                           --------------------------

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
      Name of Subsidiary                        State in which Incorporated
      ------------------                        ---------------------------
<S>                                             <C>
Bridgford Distributing Company                          California
Bridgford Meat Company                                  California
Bridgford Foods of Illinois, Inc.                       California
A.S.I. Corporation                                      California
Bridgford Distributing Company of
 Delaware (inactive)                                     Delaware
American Ham Processors, Inc.* (inactive)                Delaware
Bert Packing Company (inactive)                          Illinois
Moriarty Meat Company (inactive)                         Illinois
</TABLE>

* No shares have been issued.
1 

NO. 01-15-00284-CV 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON 

_________________________________________ 

Latrice Harris, 

Appellant 

v. 

Highland Knolls Community Association, 

Appellee.

_________________________________________

APPELLEE HIGHLAND KNOLLS COMMUNITY 

ASSOCIATION’S NOTICE OF STAY 

_________________________________________

From the Civil County Court at Law No. 2 of Harris County, Texas, 

Trial Court Case No. 908,487 

_________________________________________

TO THE HONORABLE COURT: 

Appellee Highland Knolls Community Association (hereinafter 

referred to as “Association” or “Appellee”) files this Notice of Stay 

because of a bankruptcy proceeding and would respectfully show unto 

the Court as follows: 

ACCEPTED

01-15-00284-cv

FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

4/14/2015 2:22:46 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 4/14/2015 2:22:46 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
2 

A. INTRODUCTION 

1. Appellant is Latrice Harris; appellee is Highland Knolls 

Community Association. 

2. Appellant perfected the appeal on March 25, 2015, when she 

filed a notice of appeal. 

B. ARGUMENTS AND AUTHORITIES 

3. Appellant is currently the subject of a proceeding under the 

United States Bankruptcy Code Chapter 13, which is pending in the 

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, In 

re Latrice Harris, under docket number 15-31978, filed on April 6, 2015. 

4. Under the provisions of 11 U.S.C. section 362(a), all 

proceedings are automatically stayed. 

C. CONCLUSION 

5. Appellant has initiated a bankruptcy proceeding. Therefore, 

this appeal is automatically stayed. 

D. PRAYER 

6. For these reasons, the Court is required to stay this appeal. 
3 

 Respectfully submitted, 

ROBERTS MARKEL WEINBERG BUTLER 

HAILEY PC 

/s/ Dawn S. Holiday 

____________________________________

DAWN S. HOLIDAY

TBA No. 24046090 

Cliff Davis 

TBA No. 00792447 

2800 Post Oak Blvd, 57th Floor 

Houston, TX 77056 

(713) 840-1666 

Fax: (713) 840-9404 

dholiday@rmwbhlaw.com

cdavis@rmwhbhlaw.com

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE, 

HIGHLAND KNOLLS COMMUNITY 

ASSOCIATION

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

Pursuant to Rule 9.4 i(3) of the Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure, I certify that the word count in Appellee Highland Knolls 

Community Association’s Notice of Stay is 156 words. 

 

/s/ Dawn S. Holiday 

_________________________________ 

 Dawn S. Holiday 
4 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that pursuant to Tex. R. Civ. P. 21a, a true and 

correct copy of the foregoing instrument was served upon the parties 

listed below by fax, delivery service, messenger, mail, and/or through 

the serving party’s electronic filing service provider, this 14th day of 

April, 2015. 

Via Regular Mail and

Via Certified Mail/RRR: 7010 2780 0003 0285 3297

Latrice L. Harris (Pro Se) 

2310 Enchanted Park Lane 

Katy, TX 77450 

 /s/ Dawn S. Holiday 

 ____________________________________ 

 Dawn S. Holiday
Exhibit 32.2


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 accompanying Annual Report of Lafayette Square Gulf Coast BDC, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 (the “Report”), I, Seren Tahiroglu, 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 Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and


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





Date: March 25, 2022By:/s/ Seren TahirogluSeren TahirogluChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
NOSB Spring 2021 Proposals and Discussion Documents ‐ Voti

Subcommittee Substance/ Motion Guidance Doc Type Motion by: Seconded by: Vote threshold BairdBradman Bruch Caldwell D'Amore Dimitri Greenwood 

NL Section/

Certification,Accreditation andCompliance

Motion to accept the proposal on Human Capital

Management: Strategies for Recruitment and

Talent Management ‐ Organic Inspectors and

Reviewers

NA Proposal Nate Powell

Palm

MindeeJeffery

2/3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Handling Motion to send the proposal on Ion exchange

materials back to Subcommittee for additionalwork.

NA Proposal Asa

Bradman

CarolynDimitri

2/3 N Y Y Y N N N 

Handling Motion to accept the proposal on Ion exchange

materials

NA Proposal Steve Ela Jerry

D'Amore

2/3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Crops Motion to classify paper‐based crop planting aid

as a synthetic substance.

§205.601 Proposal Steve Ela Jerry

D'Amore

2/3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Crops Motion to add to §205.2 Terms Defined: Paper‐

based crop planting aid. A material that is

comprised of at least 60% cellulose‐based fiber by

weight, including, but not limited to, pots, seedtape, and collars that are placed in or on the soiland later incorporated into the soil, excluding

biodegradable mulch film. Up to 40% of theingredients can be non‐synthetic, other permitted

synthetic ingredients at §205.601(j), or syntheticstrengthening fibers, adhesives, or resins.Contains no less than 80% biobased content as

verified by a qualified third‐party assessment (e.g.

laboratory test using ASTM D6866 or composition

review by qualified personnel). Added nutrients

must comply with §205.105, 205.203, and

205.206.

§205.601 Proposal Steve Ela Rick

Greenwood

2/3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Crops Motion to add to §205.601 (p) Production Aids:

Paper‐based crop planting aids as defined in205.2. Virgin or recycled paper without glossypaper or colored inks.

§205.601 Proposal Steve Ela Emily Oakley 2/3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Crops Motion to send the proposal on biodegradable

biobased mulch back to Subcommittee for

additional work

§205.601 Proposal Mindee

Jeffery

Nate Powell‐

Palm

2/3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 

NOSB Resolution supporting the immediate

implementation of the Organic Livestock andPoultry Practices (OLPP) rule.

NA Resolution Nate

Powell‐Palm

RickGreenwood

2/3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 

VOTING ITEMS

Page 1 of 1
## In t he

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 23

- 00058

- CV

IN RE SHAWNEE CREEK LAND OWNERS ASSOCIATION, ET AL.

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Before Stevens , C.J., van Cleef and Rambin , JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by C hief Justice Stevens2 

### ME MORANDUM OPINION

S hawnee Creek Landowners Association, Inc., et al

. (collectively Relators )

, ha ve filed a

petition for a writ of mandamus , asking this Court to grant their petition and to direct the

Honorable Jeff M. Addison

, 1 pr esiding j udge of the 102nd Judicial District Court of Red River

County, to vacate its order denying Relators ’ Rule 91a motion to dismiss and to enter an order

dismissing Real Parties in Interest’s (collectively the L and o wners ) claims, in full or in pa rt. We

deny Relators ’ requested mandamus relief.

I. Background

On February 22, 2023, the Landowners filed a lawsuit against Relators , asserting claims

for (1) declaratory judgment, (2) breach of restrictive covenan ts, (3) violat ion of Section 12.002

of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedie s Code , (4) violation of the Texas Debt Collection Act

,

(5) trespass , and (6) agency, con spiracy

, and respondeat superior

. In addition to their request for

declarato ry relief, t he Landowners ask ed fo r actual

, consequen tial, special, and exemplary

damages and attorney fees

. On April 26, 2023, Relators filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to

Rule 91a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure , arguing that the cla ims raised in the

Landowners ’ original petition were base less in fact and in law. Af ter a hearing

, 2 the trial court

denied Relators ’ motion to dismi ss

.

1 Both the Relator s and the Real Parties in Interest incorrectly refer to the Respond e n t as the Honorabl e Jeff M.

Anders on

. The Hon orable Jeff M. Addison is the current presiding judge of the 102 nd J udic ial D istrict C ourt of Red

River County and signed the order at issue in this case

.

2 Although the parties refer to the hearing on Relato r s ’ motion to dismiss , and the trial court ’s orde r denying the

motion states that a hearing was held, a transcript of the hearing was not included in the mandamus record.3

I I I. Relators ’ Petition for a Writ of Mandamus

Relators file d a petition for a wr it of mandamus, claiming that the trial court abused its

discretion by failing to dis m i ss all the La ndown ers’ ca uses of action and asking this Court to

order the trial court to vacate the order denying its motion to dismiss

. Relators also requested

that this Court enter an order dismissing the Landowners’ claims, in full or in part.

Th e C ou rt, having exa mined and fu lly considered Relators ’ petition for a writ of

mandamus, the Landowners’ response, Relators ’ reply, the mandamus recor d, and the applicable

law, is of the opinion that the mandamus petition should be denied.

III. Conclusion

A ccordingly , we deny Relators ’ p etiti on for a writ of mandamus.

Scott E. Stevens

Chief Justice

Date Submitted : August 24 , 2023

Date Decided: August 25 , 2023