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

<ARTICLE>  UT
<CIK>  0000018540
<NAME>  CENTRAL AND SOUTH WEST CORPORTION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1996
<BOOK-VALUE>                                      PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                            8,397
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                             84
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,533
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                               509
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       2,809
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      13,332
<COMMON>                                               740
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            1,022
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                  2,040
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                       3,802
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   33
<PREFERRED>                                            292
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                                 3,926
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                       0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                               90
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                         943
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                          201
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                                1
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                              8
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                         2
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                       4,034
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                       13,332
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                            5,155
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                   224
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                           4,136
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                           4,360
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                                795
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                     (61)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                         734
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               419
<NET-INCOME>                                           447
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             18
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                          429
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                               358
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                              208
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                                 875
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         2.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         2.07
        



</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-2291

IN RE: ALEXANDER MATTHEWS,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

 (1:12-cv-00132-LO; 1:11-cr-00348-LO-1; 1:11-cr-00087-LO-1)

Submitted: April 16, 2015 Decided: April 20, 2015

Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alexander Matthews, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Alexander Matthews petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking 

an order directing the district court to fully address all 

claims in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. We conclude that 

Matthews is not entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only 

in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 

U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 

516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is available 

only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. 

In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 

1988). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In 

re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).

The relief sought by Matthews is not available by way of 

mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and 

all associated supplemental and amended petitions. We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
---

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 302 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Mark Lana, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed
this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of HS3 Technologies, Inc.;

2.

Based on my
knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light
of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my
knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and
I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
small business issuer and have:

(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the small business issuer, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and
I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over
financial reporting.

Dated: February 16, 2011

/s/ Mark
LanaMark Lana Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal
Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer)

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 954 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 954

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
     To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt from the 
    individual mandate certain individuals who had coverage under a 
 terminated qualified health plan funded through the Consumer Operated 
                   and Oriented Plan (CO-OP) program.

    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 ``CO-OP Consumer Protection Act of 
2016''.

SEC. 2. EXEMPTION FROM INDIVIDUAL MANDATE FOR CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS WHO 
              HAD COVERAGE UNDER A TERMINATED HEALTH PLAN FUNDED 
              THROUGH THE CONSUMER OPERATED AND ORIENTED PLAN (CO-OP) 
              PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--Section 5000A(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(6) Certain individuals previously enrolled in health 
        plans funded through the consumer operated and oriented plan 
        (co-op) program.--Any applicable individual for any month if--
                    ``(A) such individual was enrolled in minimum 
                essential coverage offered by a qualified nonprofit 
                health insurance issuer (as defined in subsection (c) 
                of section 1322 of the Patient Protection and 
                Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18042)) receiving funds 
                with respect to such coverage through the Consumer 
                Operated and Oriented Plan program established under 
                such section,
                    ``(B) during the calendar year which includes such 
                month, such issuer terminated such coverage in the area 
                in which the individual resides, and
                    ``(C) such month ends after the date on which such 
                coverage was so terminated.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to months beginning after December 31, 2013.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 27, 2016.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
114th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 954

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

     To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt from the 
    individual mandate certain individuals who had coverage under a 
 terminated qualified health plan funded through the Consumer Operated 
                   and Oriented Plan (CO-OP) program.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM HEALTH CARE
AND RETIREMENT CORPORATION'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED
MARCH 31, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           8,106
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  139,541
<ALLOWANCES>                                    13,962
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               162,652
<PP&E>                                         653,448
<DEPRECIATION>                                 114,017
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 889,572
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          132,263
<BONDS>                                        273,626
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           489
<OTHER-SE>                                     399,070
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   889,572
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               213,912
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  170,415
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,766
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,480
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 23,555
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,231
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             16,324
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    16,324
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .35
        

</TABLE>
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

PR/Research

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CARLOS ROBERTO PALACIOSGUZMAN,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-74136

Agency No. A097-907-476

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 16, 2010** 

Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Carlos Roberto Palacios-Guzman, a native and citizen of El Salvador,

petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing

his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for

FILED

FEB 25 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
PR/Research 2 07-74136

asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against

Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for

substantial evidence, Ornelas-Chavez v. Gonzales, 458 F.3d 1052, 1055-56 (9th

Cir. 2006), and we deny the petition for review.

The record does not compel the conclusion that Palacios-Guzman

demonstrated changed circumstances to excuse his untimely asylum application. 

See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4(a)(4). Accordingly, we deny the petition as to his asylum

claim.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Palacios-Guzman

did not establish past persecution or a clear probability of future persecution,

because he failed to demonstrate the government was unwilling or unable to

protect him from the group that kidnapped him. See Nahrvani v. Gonzales, 399

F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2005); see also Castro-Perez v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d

1069, 1072 (9th Cir. 2005) (failure to report non-governmental persecution due to

belief that police would do nothing did not establish that government was

unwilling or unable to control persecutors). Accordingly, Palacios-Guzman’s

withholding of removal claim fails.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Palacios-Guzman’s

CAT claim because he failed to demonstrate it is more likely than not he will be
PR/Research 3 07-74136

tortured if returned to El Salvador. See Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940, 948-49

(9th Cir. 2007).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    Homecommentreply12451Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  Liria S. Figue... (not verified)PermalinkMay 10, 2023 - 2:53pmWhat an honor to have crossed paths with another human being who understands that one needs to enjoy the work one does!
ReplyYour name
Email Address
        The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Comment
About text formats
Plain text
  
  
      
          No HTML tags allowed.
                      Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
                      Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-152046, 333-155416, 333-155416-04 and 333-155416-05) and the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-50793, 333-133998 and 333-136971) of Ameren Corporation of our report dated March 2, 2009relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 

St. Louis, Missouri 

March 2, 2009
MOAB Construction 

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 16, 2015

No. 04-15-00096-CV

ALS 88 DESIGN BUILD LLC,

Appellant

v.

MOAB CONSTRUCTION CO.,

Appellee

From the 407th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-CI-03033

Honorable Gloria Saldana, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Before the Court is appellant’s motion to abate appeal pending the trial court’s 

determination of appellant’s motion for judgment nov and appellee’s motion to enter judgment. 

Appellant advised this Court these motions were heard in the trial court on April 8, 2015. 

Appellant is instructed to file a status report with this Court within 10 days of the date of 

this Order advising the Court of the trial court’s determination of appellant’s motion for 

judgment nov and appellee’s motion to enter judgment. 

_________________________________

Jason Pulliam, Justice

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

court on this 16th day of April, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
NO. 02
- 13
- 00051
- CR NO. 02
- 13
- 0005 2
- CR
TRIMYIAN BARROW A/K/ A TRYMYIAN BARROW APPELLANT

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

---------- FROM THE 297TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

---------- 

### MEM ORANDUM OPINION 1

---------- Pursuant to a plea bargain, Appellant Trimyian Barrow a/k/a Trymyian

Barrow pled guilty to aggravated sexual assault by threats and placing in fear, a
first

- degree felony, 2 and violating a protective order, a third

- degree felon y, 3 and

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

2 See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.021(a)(1), (2)(A)(ii)

– (iii), (e) (West Supp. 2012).

3 See id. § 25.07(a), (g).2

the trial court convicted h im of th ose offense s and sentenced h im to ten years ’
confinement in each case . Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal in each case

. For each case, t he trial court’s certification states that this is a plea

bargained case and that Appellant has no right of appeal. Accordingly, we informed Appellant by letter on February 6 , 2013 , that th e s e case s w ere subject
to dismissal unless he or any party showed grounds for continuing the appeal s
on or before Tuesday , February 19 , 201 3

. 4 Appellant timely responded, but his response does not raise grounds for continuing the appeals. We therefore
dismiss th e s e appeal s

. 5

PER CURIAM

PANEL: DAUPHINOT, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App

. P. 47.2(b )

DELIVERED: Ma rch 28, 2013

4 See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), 25.2(d).

5 See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f).
EXHIBIT 24.3
                                POWER OF ATTORNEY


The  undersigned,  as  Controller  of Central  and South West  Corporation  (the
"Corporation"), hereby makes, constitutes and appoints E. R. Brooks and Glenn D.
Rosilier, and each of them severally,  his true and lawful  attorney-in-fact and
agents,  each with full power and authority (acting alone and without the other)
to  execute  in the  name  and on  behalf  of the  undersigned,  in any  and all
capacities,  the  Corporation's  Annual Report on Form 10-K for 1999 and any and
all amendments  thereto,  to be filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended,  and any other documents and instruments  incidental thereto, and to
file the  same,  with all  exhibits  thereto  and all  documents  in  connection
therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission,  hereby granting to such
attorney-in-fact,  and agents,  and each of them,  full power and  authority  of
substitution  and  revocation in the premises and full power and authority to do
and perform each and every act and thing  requisite  and necessary to be done in
and about the premises, as fully for all intents and purposes as the undersigned
might or could do in person and hereby  ratifying and  confirming  all that such
attorney-in-fact and agent, or any of them, may do or cause to be done by virtue
of this Power of Attorney.

IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  I have hereunto  executed this Power of Attorney this 19th
day of January, 2000.


                                                /s/ Lawrence B. Connors
                                                Lawrence B. Connors
                                                Controller


Subscribed and sworn to before me this 19th day of January, 2000.

                                                /s/ Judy A. Hall
                                                Notary Public
                                                State of Texas

My Commission Expires:  July 20, 2003