alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                                         
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                         
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                           
|View History: Annual                                                                                     
|View History: Annual                                                                                     
|View History:                                                                                            
|                                                                                                         
|West Virginia Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                         
|                                                                                                         
|West Virginia Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                         

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0     
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 1      | 17     | 23     | 27     | 104    | 22     | 31     | 111    | W      | 123   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 82     | 93     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. LEE BANK & TRUST COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 4154.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

April 13, 1937.

*1022Joseph H. Chitwood, U. S.. Atty., of Roanoke, Va., and Howard C. Gilmer, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., of Pulaski, Va.

Guy A. Kaufman, of Pennington Gap, Va., Robert L. Pennington, of Bristol, Va., and George P. Cridlin, of Jonesville, Va., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment of District Court affirmed. Judgment filed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME AND RETAINED
EARNINGS, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          48,241
<SECURITIES>                                     1,510
<RECEIVABLES>                                  198,303<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F2>
<INVENTORY>                                    346,020
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               601,362
<PP&E>                                         133,734<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0<F2>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 781,774
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          540,143
<BONDS>                                         97,923
<COMMON>                                         2,373
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            8,748
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      81,321
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   781,774
<SALES>                                        559,396
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               559,396
<CGS>                                          515,538
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  515,538
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0<F2>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0<F2>
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,317
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,056
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,419
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,419
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.45
<FN>
<F1>SHOWN NET IN FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
<F2>NOT SHOWN SEPARATELY UNDER MATERIALITY GUIDELINES.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5075 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5075

         To extend the temporary suspension of duty on helium.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

 Mr. Gerlach introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To extend the temporary suspension of duty on helium.

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

SECTION 1. HELIUM.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.01.47 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to helium) is amended by 
striking the date in the effective period column and inserting ``12/31/
2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5073 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5073

 To extend the suspension of duty on styrene, ar-ethyl-, polymer with 
      divinylbenzene and styrene beads having low ash content and 
  specifically manufactured for use as a specialty filler in lost wax 
   mold casting applications in a variety of other specialty filler 
                             applications.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

 Mr. Gerlach introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the suspension of duty on styrene, ar-ethyl-, polymer with 
      divinylbenzene and styrene beads having low ash content and 
  specifically manufactured for use as a specialty filler in lost wax 
   mold casting applications in a variety of other specialty filler 
                             applications.

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

SECTION 1. STYRENE, AR-ETHYL-, POLYMER WITH DIVINYLBENZENE AND STYRENE 
              BEADS HAVING LOW ASH CONTENT AND SPECIFICALLY 
              MANUFACTURED FOR USE AS A SPECIALTY FILLER IN LOST WAX 
              MOLD CASTING APPLICATIONS IN A VARIETY OF OTHER SPECIALTY 
              FILLER APPLICATIONS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.25.40 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to styrene, ar-ethyl-, polymer 
with divinylbenzene and styrene beads having low ash content and 
specifically manufactured for use as a specialty filler in lost wax 
mold casting applications in a variety of other specialty filler 
applications) is amended by striking the date in the effective period 
column and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section applies to 
goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 
the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.1**

**AFFINITY GROUP HOLDING, INC.**

**STATEMENT PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

I,Michael A. Schneider, President and Chief Executive Officer of Affinity GroupHolding, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), hereby certify asfollows:
| 1.     |   | This statement is provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350 in connection with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for  the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (the “Periodic Report”);        |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |
| 2.     |   | The Periodic Report fully complies with the  requirements of section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of  1934, as amended; and                                                                          |
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |
| 3.     |   | The information contained in the Periodic Report  fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and  results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods  indicated therein. |

 

 

Date:  March 20, 2007

 

 
|   | /s/ Michael A. Schneider              |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Michael A. Schneider                  |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

1

----
#### Horace R. BROWN, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

March 19, 1954.

Hines & Hines, Thomas W. Hines, Bowling Green; for appellant.

Marshall Funk, Aaron F. Overfelt, Bowling Green, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This is a motion for an appeal from a judgment for $2,143 based upon a jury verdict on a subrogation claim of appellee. We have examined the instructions about which complaint is made, and are of the opinion that they properly submitted the case to the jury in the absence of written instructions offered by appellant upon specific defenses upon which he wished to rely. See Evans v. Dotson, 1953, Ky., 255 S.W.2d 476.

The motion is overruled, and the judgment is affirmed.
|                                                                                                          
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                          
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                            
|View History: Annual                                                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                                      
|View History:                                                                                             
|                                                                                                          
|Texas - RRC District 7B Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                          
|                                                                                                          
|Texas - RRC District 7B Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Acquisitions (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                          

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 84     | 12     | 17     | 6      | 25     | 141    | 65     | 89     | 19     | 32    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 2,182  | 133    | 17     | 0      | 406    | 455    | 190    | 164    | 6     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 51     | 352    |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4778 

To extend the suspension of duty on N,N-Hexane-1,6-diylbis(3-(3,5-di-tertbutyl-4-hydroxy-phenylpropionamide)). 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 25, 2012 

Mr. ROSS of Arkansas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the suspension of duty on N,N-Hexane-1,6- 

diylbis(3-(3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxy-phenylpropionamide)). 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. N,N-HEXANE-1,6-DIYLBIS(3-(3,5-DI-TERT-BUTYL4 4-HYDROXY-PHENYLPROPIONAMIDE)). 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.24.23 of the Har6 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

7 N,N-Hexane-1,6-diylbis(3-(3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxy8 phenylpropionamide))) is amended by striking the date in 

9 the effective period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4778 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 this section applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-10051 Conference Calendar

JOHN R. DOWARD, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus STATE OF TEXAS, Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:97-CV-995-E

- - - - - - - - - - June 17, 1998 Before DAVIS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * John R. Doward, federal prisoner # 14709-038, filed an application under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for writ of habeas corpus by a person in state custody. The district court summarily dismissed Doward’s § 2254 application as time barred by the one-year statute of limitations in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). The district court did not have subject matter jurisdiction to entertain Doward’s § 2254 application. In Pleasant v. Texas ,No. 98-10051 -2- 134 F.3d 1256, 1257 (5th Cir. 1998), we addressed the claim of a federal prisoner seeking § 2254 relief “because his Texas conviction was used to enhance the federal sentence for which he is currently incarcerated.” We cited Maleng v. Cook , 490 U.S. 488, 492 (1989), for the proposition “that a petitioner whose sentence has expired is no longer ‘in custody’ for purposes of that conviction, even if it was used to enhance his current or future sentences.” Pleasant , 134 F.3d at 1258. Doward’s state sentence has expired and he is now in federal custody in Terre Haute, Indiana, for a conviction from the United States District Court for New Hampshire. As in Pleasant , the district court did not have subject matter jurisdiction over the § 2254 application. Accordingly, Doward’s motions for a certificate of appealability (COA) and leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) are GRANTED. The judgment of the district court is hereby VACATED and the case REMANDED with instructions that it be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. MOTIONS GRANTED; VACATED and REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.
## T

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA OP 22-0491

b RANDY DENNISON,

Petitioner,
v. MIKE LINDER, Yellowstone County Sherriff, YELLOWSTONE COUNTY DETENTION FACILTY, JOHN RYAN, Yellowstone County Attorney's Office, and HON. BRETT LINNEWEBER,

Respondents. 

### OCT 1 8 2022 Bovven Greenwood C;• .rrc of Suprerne Court State of Montana
ORDER

Self-represented Petitioner Randy Dennison has filed a "Motion to Amend Information" one day after this Court issued its Order denying his petition for habeas corpus relief. We deem his motion a petition for rehearing under our rules. M. R. App. P. 20(1) provides criteria for rehearing. This Court "will consider a petition forrehearingpresented only upon . [t]hat it overlooked some fact material tothe decision[,]
. . . or [t]hat its decision conflicts with a statute or controlling decision not addressed by the supreme court." M. R. App. P. 20(1)(a)(i) and (iii). "Absent clearly demonstrated exceptional circumstances, the supreme court will not grant petitions for rehearing of its orders disposing of motions or petitions for extraordinary writs." M. R. App. P. 20(1)(d). Dennison contends that this Court should grant his writ for relief and dismiss his fourpendingcases in theYellowstone County District Court. He states that he has not had "a meaningful hearing" on the State's Petition to Revoke. Dennison mentions that he has been held for four months on excessive bail of$100,000. This Court addressed Dennison's claims about bail and due process violations in our prior Order, resulting in its denial. As stated before, Dennison has not demonstrated 10/18/2022

Case Number: OP 22-0491illegal incarceration pursuant to § 46-22-101(1), MCA. Dennison provides no basis or

criteria to warrant a rehearinghere. Accordingly, ITISORDEREDthatDennison'sMotiontoAmendInformation,deemeda Petition for Rehearing, is DENIED and DISMISSED. The Clerk ofthe Supreme Court is directed to provide a copy ofthis Order to: the Honorable Brett D. Linneweber, District Court Judge; Terry Halpin, Clerk of District Court, Yellowstone County, under Cause Nos. DC-2020-948, DC-2020-1138, DC-2020- 1386,andDC-2021-665; SheriffMikeLinder;John Ryan, YellowstoneCountyAttorney's Office; J. Tomicich, Defense Counsel; counsel of record, and to Randy Dennison personally. DATED this

# ,e day ofOctober, 2022.

Justices

2
|                                                                                                           
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                           
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                             
|View History: Annual                                                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                                       
|View History:                                                                                              
|                                                                                                           
|No chart available.                                                                                        
|No chart available.                                                                                        
|                                                                                                           
|                                                                                                           
|Montana Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves New Reservoir in Old Fields (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                           

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023