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

<ARTICLE> 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           141,236
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                      27,342
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 168,578
<CASH>                                          11,483
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                               1,433
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                           9,033
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 225,938
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                 96,642
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             33,154
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        41,167
<OTHER-SE>                                      44,475
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   225,938
<PREMIUMS>                                      72,050
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              7,910
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                 260
<OTHER-INCOME>                                     282
<BENEFITS>                                      40,118
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                     22,210
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                             1,386
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,788
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,414
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,374
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,374
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.88
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.86
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                  68,246<F1>
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                             41,083
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                (965)
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                               7,427
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                15,214
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                 85,723<F1>
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
<FN>
<F1>UNPAID LOSS AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSES DIFFER FROM THE AMOUNTS REPORTED IN
THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS BECAUSE OF THE INCLUSION HEREIN OF
REINSURANCE RECEIVABLES OF $10,919 AND $9,440 AT DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND 1995,
RESPECTIVELY.
</FN>


</TABLE>
Ernst& Young LLP	 Phone: (816) 474-5200
	One Kansas City Place		www.ey.com
	1200 Main Street
	Kansas Cit)6 Missouri 64105-2143
Report on Management's Assertion on Compliance
With the Minimum Servicing Standards Set Forth in the
Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers

Report of Independent Accountants

The Audit Committee
 The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying report titled Report of Management, that Midland Loan Services, Inc. (MLS), an indirectly wholly owned subsidiary of The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., complied with the minimum servicing standards set forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers (USAP) except for commercial loan and multifamily loan servicing, minimum servicing standards V.4. and VI.1., which the Mortgage Bankers Association of America has interpreted as inapplicable to such servicing during the year ended December 31, 2001. Management is responsible for MLS's compliance with those requirements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertions about MLS's compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about MLS's compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on MLS's compliance with specified requirements.

In our opinion, management's assertion that NELS complied with the aforementioned requirements during the year ended December 31, 2001 is fairly stated, in all material respects.
February 15, 2002
02M-OV5919	Ernst & Young LLP is a member of Ernst & Young International, Ltd.
Exhibit 32          CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                         AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFCIER
            PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the quarterly Report of TheraBiogen, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
we, Kelly T. Hickel, Chief Executive Officer and Robert Hipple, Manager of
CF Consulting, LLC, principal financial officer, 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 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.

December 5, 2008

/s/ Kelly T. Hickel
--------------------------------------
Kelly T. Hickel
Chief Executive Officer

/s/ Robert Hipple
--------------------------------------
Robert Hipple, Manager
CF Consulting, LLC
Principal Financial Officer
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4553 

To require a review of the authorization, funding, management, and operation 

of the National Targeting Center and the Terrorist Screening Center, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 5, 2017 

Mr. GARRETT (for himself, Mr. MCCAUL, Mr. KATKO, Mr. RUTHERFORD, Mr. 

GALLAGHER, Mr. FITZPATRICK, and Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and 

Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 

the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To require a review of the authorization, funding, management, and operation of the National Targeting Center 

and the Terrorist Screening Center, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Terrorist Screening 

5 and Targeting Review Act of 2017’’. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4553 IH

1 SEC. 2. GAO REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL TARGETING CEN2 TER AND THE TERRORIST SCREENING CEN3 TER. 

4 Not later than one year after the date of the enact5 ment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 

6 States shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Secu7 rity and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of 

8 Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security 

9 and Governmental Affairs and the Committee on the Judi10 ciary of the Senate a review of the authorization, funding, 

11 management, and operation of the National Targeting 

12 Center (NTC) established under section 411(g)(4) of the 

13 Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 USC 211(g)(4)) and 

14 the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) established under 

15 Homeland Security President Directive 6. Such review 

16 shall include the following: 

17 (1) An identification of any weaknesses or gaps 

18 in coordination between the NTC and TSC. 

19 (2) An identification of any unnecessarily dupli20 cative or overlapping efforts between the NTC and 

21 TSC. 

22 (3) Recommendations on how the NTC and 

23 TSC may better support and complement one an24 other. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4553 IH

1 (4) A cost-benefit analysis of congressional au2 thorization of the TSC. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 120 (Monday, September 10, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5729]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

             RESIGNATION FROM THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following 
resignation from the House of Representatives:

                                         House of Representatives,

                                               Washington, DC,

                                                  August 15, 2012.
     Hon. John Boehner,
     Speaker of the House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Boehner: I write to inform you that I have 
     notified California Governor Jerry Brown of my resignation 
     from the House, effective midnight tonight, August 15th.
       It has been a tremendous honor to represent my friends and 
     neighbors from California's Central Valley, both in Congress 
     and the California State Assembly. I look back with pride on 
     what we have accomplished. The real honor of serving in 
     Congress is not working in historic buildings, but in 
     laboring with so many unbelievably talented and dedicated 
     individuals who serve our Nation daily.
           Sincerely,
     Dennis Cardoza.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,

                                               Washington, DC,

                                                  August 15, 2012.
     Hon. Edmund G. Brown, 
     Governor of California,
     Sacramento, CA.
       Dear Governor Brown: I write to inform you that I will 
     resign my House seat, effective midnight tonight, August 
     15th.
       It has been a tremendous honor to represent my friends and 
     neighbors from California's Central Valley, both in Congress 
     and the California State Assembly. I look back with pride on 
     what we have accomplished. The real honor of serving in 
     Congress is not working in historic buildings, but in 
     laboring with so many unbelievably talented and dedicated 
     individuals who serve our Nation daily.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Dennis Cardoza.

     

                          ____________________
```
#### Ellen M. Keene, Respondent-Appellant, v George T. Keene, Appellant-Respondent.

— Order unanimously affirmed with costs; cross appeal dismissed without costs. Memorandum: In this proceeding by petitioner to enforce a separation agreement and divorce decree, respondent appeals and petitioner cross-appeals from an order that denied respondent’s motion to vacate a prior order entered on default. The court properly denied respondent’s motion to vacate the default because he showed neither a reasonable excuse for the default nor a meritorious defense to the enforcement proceeding *(see,*CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; *Fidelity & Deposit Co. v Andersen & Co.,*60 NY2d 693, 695). In his affidavit, respondent’s attorney did not address the reasons for his delay in providing the discovery material and his failure to submit a verified answer in proper form, except to state that he believed that the dispute would be settled. That does not excuse the willful failure to comply with the court’s order directing service of a proper answer, and does not explain the failure to contact the court or his opponent for over six months.

With respect to whether respondent showed a meritorious defense to the enforcement application, we conclude that the $117,000 retirement incentive constitutes "current gross income” as that phrase was used in the parties’ separation *667agreement. We thus conclude that the retirement incentive is subject to petitioner’s claim for maintenance, and that the cases cited by respondent *(see, Richmond v Richmond,*144 AD2d 549; *Harrell v Harrell,*120 AD2d 565; *Biddlecom v Biddlecom,*113 AD2d 66) are distinguishable.

Because petitioner is not aggrieved by the order, we dismiss her cross appeal. (Appeals from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Stander, J. — Enforce Divorce Decree.) Present —Denman, J. P., Boomer, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
#### WESTERN AUTO STORE v. AUTO PARTS & EQUIPMENT CO.

No. 36006.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

July 14, 1953.

*536George W. Moser, Comanche, for plaintiff in error.

Jerome Sullivan, Duncan, for, defendant in error. •

CORN, Justice.

' This action was brought by,Auto Parts and Equipment Company, a corporation, to enjoin C. D. Hanks, owner and operator of 'Western Auto Store, from selling a commercial product below,a certain price.. At a hearing held November 14, 1952,, the court granted a temporary injunction. No appeal was taken from this order. C. D. Hanks thereafter filed a general demurrer and a special demurrer and on the 9th day of January 1953, the court overruled both the general and the special demurrer.

Although the defendant C. D. Hanks stated in open court that he did not desire to plead further and stood upon his demurrers, no judgment was entered other than to overrule the demurrers.

A motion to dismiss has been filed for the reason that the order as made cannot be reviewed until there has been a final judgment or order in the case. The motion to-dismiss must be sustained. In Robertson v. State ex rel. Pinson, 195 Okl. 641, 163 P.2d 975, it is stated:

> “An order overruling a demurrer to the petition is not a final order, and where an appeal is taken from such order prior to the entry of a final judgment or order in the cause, such appeal presents nothing properly reviewable by this court.”

This has been, the repeated holding c:£ this court. See, Board of Com’rs of Harmon County v. Kenn, Dist. Judge, 194 Okl. 593, 153 P.2d 483; Oklahoma City-Ada-Atoka Ry. Co. v. Parks, 182 Okl. 598, 78 P.2d 791; McGrath v. Rorem, 123 Okl. 163, 252 P. 418.

Appeal dismissed.
# C_2008116EN.01002401.xml

| 9.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 116/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 116/24

---

Action brought on 27 February 2008 — Zino Davidoff v OHIM — Clifarm i. Kleinakis & SIA (GOOD LIFE)

(Case T-108/08)

(2008/C 116/44)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Zino Davidoff SA (Fribourg, Switzerland) (represented by: H. Kunz-Hallstein and R. Kunz-Hallstein, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Clifarm i. Kleinakis & SIA OE (Glyfada, Greece)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the OHIM in Case R 298/2007-2; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the OHIM in Case R 298/2007-2;

| — | order the OHIM or the intervener to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the OHIM or the intervener to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for the Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘GOOD LIFE’ for goods in class 3 — application No 1 709 641

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Clifarm i. Kleinakis & SIA OE

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited: The Community and national word marks ‘GOOD LIFE’ for goods in classes 3, 5 and 16

Mark or sign cited:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition in its entirety

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the Opposition Division's decision and remittal of the case to the Opposition Division for further consideration

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 43, 73 and 74 of Council Regulation No 40/94 and of Rule 22 of Commission Regulation No 2868/95, among others as the Board of Appeal has taken into account goods for which the trade mark applied for does not claim protection and on which the opposition was not based; as the Board of Appeal should not have taken into consideration the evidence presented by Clifarm i. Kleinakis & SIA OE for use of its trade marks; and as the Board of Appeal has considered evidence that the applicant could not evaluate.

Pleas in law:

---
Exhibit
23.1





CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








We have issued our report dated
March 14, 2008, accompanying the consoli­dated financial statements and
schedule, included in the Annual Report of Aetrium Incorporated on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2007.  We hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of
Aetrium Incorporated on Forms S-3 (File No. 333-49577 effective April 7,
1998, File No. 333-49577 effective April 28, 1998, File No. 333-81982 effective
February 1, 2002, and File No. 333-81982 effective April 12, 2002) and on Forms
S-8 (File No. 333-111747 effective January 7, 2004, File No. 333-111748
effective January 7, 2004, and File No. 033-74616 effective March 29,
2005).





/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP











Minneapolis,
Minnesota


March 14,
2008
# C_2010051EN.01000801.xml

| 27.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 17 December 2009 — European Commission v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-248/08) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 - Articles 4(2)(a) and (c), 5(2)(c), 6(2)(b), 10 to 15, 17, 18 and 26 - Animal by-products - Waste - Burial without prior treatment - Lack of official controls - Plants for the safe management of animal by-products - Operation - Lack of authorisation - Incineration of specified risk materials - No adequate process)

2010/C 51/11

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: H. Tserepa-Lacombe and A. Markoulli, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: V. Kontolaimos, S. Charitaki, E.-M. Mamouna and Chalkias, acting as agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Breach of Articles 4(2), 5(2), 10 to 15, 17, 18 and 26 of Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 October 2002 laying down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption (OJ 2002 L 273, p. 1) — Burial of animal bi-products without prior treatment — Lack of official controls

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | By not correctly applying and imposing Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 October 2002 laying down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption, in so far as it regards burial in landfills without prior treatment, lack of official controls, authorisation of plants for the management of animal by-products and incineration of specified risk materials, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 4(2)(a) and (c), 5(2)(c), 6(2)(b), 10 to 15, 17, 18 and 26 of Regulation No 1774/2002; |
| --- | --- |

1.

By not correctly applying and imposing Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 October 2002 laying down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption, in so far as it regards burial in landfills without prior treatment, lack of official controls, authorisation of plants for the management of animal by-products and incineration of specified risk materials, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 4(2)(a) and (c), 5(2)(c), 6(2)(b), 10 to 15, 17, 18 and 26 of Regulation No 1774/2002;

| 2. | orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 209 of 15.08.2008

1

---
**EXHIBIT 32.1****Certification**     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), Stephen S.Schwartz, Chief Executive Officer of Asyst Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”), and Michael A.Sicuro, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of hisknowledge:     1. The Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2007, to whichthis Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Periodic Report”), fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and     2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated: June 12, 2007         /s/ STEPHEN S. SCHWARTZ /s/ MICHAEL A. SICURO           Stephen S. Schwartz, Ph.D. Michael A. Sicuro    Chief Executive Officer Chief Financial Officer  This certification is not deemed to be “filed” for purposes of section 18 of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. This certification isnot deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 orSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates itby reference.
<PAGE>

     EXHIBIT 23.2

     INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

     We consent to the incorporation by reference, in Form S-8 Registration
     Statement Numbers 33-95602 and 333-37756 and Form S-3 Registration
     Statement No. 333-44096, of our report dated March 16, 2001 (which report
     expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph
     related to the Company's change of method of revenue recognition),
     appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Covalent Group, Inc. for
     the year ended December 31, 2000.


     DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

     Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
     April 12, 2001