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

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 1997 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND
RETAINED EARNINGS AND OF CASH FLOWS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    3,243,293
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     16,261
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         277,094      
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       429,724      
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,966,372
<COMMON>                                       181,333        
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      827,793      
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            421,147
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               1,430,273        
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           41,033
<PREFERRED>                                    126,027   
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         1,278,659        
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                              15,300     
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   27,729     
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                        2,432
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               1,044,919     
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                3,966,372        
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      626,893      
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            43,942     
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     457,029      
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     500,971     
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        125,922      
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               3,006    
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 128,928      
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        48,845     
<NET-INCOME>                                    80,083     
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                     (3,820)    
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   76,263     
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        70,601     
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         149,063
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0   
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
J.

laches, appellant failed to demonstrate that his plea was invalid. See State v. Freese, 116 Nev. 1097, 1105, 13 P.3d 442, 448 (2000);Bryant v. State, 102 Nev. 268, 271, 721 P.2d 364, 367 (1986). Appellant was informed of the possibility of restitution in the written plea agreement, and he affirmed during the plea canvass that he had read and understood the plea agreement. Therefore, the district court did not err in denying this portion of the motion.

Appellant also claimed that the amount of restitution was incorrect and that the restitution was imposed in an improper manner. To the extent that appellant sought to correct his sentence on this basis, he failed to demonstrate that his sentence was facially illegal. See Edwards v. State, 112 Nev. 704, 708, 918 P.2d 321, 324 (1996). Therefore, the district court did not err in denying this portion of the motion.

Having concluded that appellant is not entitled to relief, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

Gibbons
Douglas

Saitta

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA (0) 1947A cc: Hon. Jerome T. Tao, District Judge

Israel Lopez Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk 2 YIVEME T-MtlISSEMINEMONSIMINIIMIENHEREM -'
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 9, 2010 

s0830 

Order 

 

September 9, 2010 

141068 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141068 

 COA: 296457 

Ingham CC: 08-001044-FC 

QUINTIN LASHAR HOLMES, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 23, 2010 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4852 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4852

  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Ethene, tetrafluoro, 
         oxidized, polymerized reduced, methyl esters, reduced.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 26, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Ethene, tetrafluoro, 
         oxidized, polymerized reduced, methyl esters, reduced.

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

SECTION 1. ETHENE, TETRAFLUORO, OXIDIZED, POLYMERIZED REDUCED, METHYL 
              ESTERS, REDUCED.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.23.19 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Ethene, tetrafluoro, 
oxidized, polymerized reduced, methyl esters, reduced) 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 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
----

Action brought on 5 April 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-179/06)

(2006/C 143/49)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Recchia, Agent)

Defendant: Italian Republic

Form of order sought

Pleas in law and main arguments

The alteration to the development plan concerning the construction operations falling within SPA and SCIp IT 912007 Murgia Alta was not the subject of an appropriate assessment of the impact on the area, as provided for in Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC.

The resolution of the municipality of Altamura and the Regional Executive, which approved the said alteration to the development plan, is in contravention of the abovementioned Community provisions, in that, although the said alteration was liable to have a significant impact on SPA and SCIp IT 9120007 Murgia Alta, an impact assessment procedure was not carried out.

The reason stated for the absence of an assessment clearly does not comply with Community law. The reason given is that the size of the construction operations fell below the thresholds set by the domestic law implementing Directives 85/337/EEC, as amended, (2) and 92/43/EEC. However, under Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC ‘any plan or project’ likely to have a significant impact on the site must be subject to an impact assessment, and this obligation is not limited to a list of projects the size of which exceeds the threshold set.

----

(1)  OJ L 206, p. 7.

(2)  OJ L 175, p. 40.

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO ANTONIO DIVISION

USA

vs.

1 Joshua Lopez

§

§

§

§

§

CRIMINAL NO:

SA:20-CR-00095(1)-FB

ORDER SETTING SENTENCING

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above entitled and numbered case is set set for

SENTENCING in Courtroom 2, on the First Floor of the John H. Wood, Jr. United States

Courthouse, 655 East Cesar E. Chavez Boulevard, San Antonio, TX, on Tuesday, November

30, 2021 at 09:00 AM.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall send a copy of this order to

counsel for defendant, the United States Attorney, United States Pretrial Services and the United

States Probation Office. Counsel for the defendant shall notify the defendant of this setting and,

if the defendant is on bond, advise the defendant to be present at this proceeding.

IT 3rd day of August, 2021.

Fred Biery

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:20-cr-00095-FB Document 93 Filed 08/03/21 Page 1 of 1
|                                                                                                                        
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                        
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                          
|View History: Annual                                                                                                    
|View History: Annual                                                                                                    
|View History:                                                                                                           
|                                                                                                                        
|Texas - RRC District 9 Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                                        
|Texas - RRC District 9 Nonassociated Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Reserves Divestitures (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                                                                                                                            | 7      | 15     | 52     | 229    | 551    | 324    | 560    | 48     | 53     | 69    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 95     | 1,282  | 380    | 630    | 152    | 248    | 1      | 95     | 759    | 696   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 2,789  | 81     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
#### HAMLETT v. STATE.

No. 25482.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 7, 1951.

*167No attorney on appeal for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of driving an automobile while intoxicated and by the jury assessed a fine of $200.00,

The only matter complained of herein is relative to the testimony of a State’s witness that a urine test was offered to the appellant at the time of his arrest. There is no testimony herein relative to what such test revealed, if anything. It is also observed that the matter of having been offered such test was first brought out by the appellant’s attorney, and was not otherwise referred to except upon cross-examination of the State’s witness. It seems to us that this-is an attempt upon the part of the appellant to bring out upon cross-examination this matter to which he offers his obj ection and exception. It is not shown what the result of such test was and the State made no offer to do so. Under the authorities set out in 4 Tex.Jur. p. 309, sec. 215, these bills are insufficient to show any error.

Finding no error in the record, the judgment is affirmed.
```
**CERTIFICATION**

I, ALAN J. FOHRER, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, of Southern
California Edison Company;

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
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   The registrant'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 registrant
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 registrant, 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 registrant'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 registrant's internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case
of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting; and

5.   The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of
internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the
registrant'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 registrant'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 registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  November 8, 2004

                                                /s/ ALAN J. FOHRER
                                    ------------------------------------------
                                                  ALAN J. FOHRER
                                              Chief Executive Officer
```
Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of the Registrant



|                                          |  |                        |  |                                           
|----------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------
|Subsidiary                                |  | State of Incorporation |  | Additional Information                    
|Global Alliance Holdings, Ltd.            |  | Pennsylvania           |  | d/b/a Eastern Alliance Insurance Group    
|                                          |  |                       
|Eastern Alliance Insurance Company        |  | Pennsylvania           |  | Member of Eastern Alliance Insurance Group
|                                          |  |                       
|Allied Eastern Indemnity Company          |  | Pennsylvania           |  | Member of Eastern Alliance Insurance Group
|                                          |  |                       
|Eastern Advantage Assurance Company       |  | Pennsylvania           |  | Member of Eastern Alliance Insurance Group
|                                          |  |                       
|Employers Alliance, Inc.                  |  | Pennsylvania           |  |                                           
|                                          |  |                       
|Eastern Re, Ltd. S.P.C.                   |  | Cayman Islands         |  |                                           
|                                          |  |                       
|Eastern Services Corporation              |  | Pennsylvania           |  |                                           
|                                          |  |                       
|Eastern Life and Health Insurance Company |  | Pennsylvania           |  |                                           
|                                          |  |                       
|Employers Security Insurance Company      |  | Indiana                |  | Member of Eastern Alliance Insurance Group
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21
- 0290 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. KYLE LEE SEVERSON ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including October 12, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 29 2022

08/29/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0290
Harbor Light 

Assembly of God 

November 16, 2014 

Mr. Kevin Schlemmer, Chief, EAS DivisiPlL 

Office of Aviation Analysis · '' ·. 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Continuation of Alaska Airlines' Essential Air Service at Cordova, Gustavus, Petersburg, Wrangell, and Yakutat, Alaska, Docket OST-1998-4899 

Dear Mr. Schlemmer : 

I would like to say THANK YOU for the years of service provided since my 

family moved from Austin, Texas to Wrangell, Alaska!! As you can only imagine, this was a huge change for our family, but well worth it!! 

As Pastors, here in Wrangell, for 14 years, we strongly support the selection 

of Alaska Airlines to continue to provide essential air service to our community. 

This service connects Southeast Alaska passengers to the rest of the outside 

world, with just one flight! It also provides access to the extensive route system of Alaska Airlines and benefits the marketing relationships with other carriers. The passenger and cargo aircraft, which Alaska Airlines proposes to 

continue using on this route, will provide freight, mail and cargo capacity that 

other carriers simply cannot provide. 

Further, Alaska Airlines aircraft are equipped with Required Navigation Performance Technology, which enables the airline to reliably access the airport 

during inclement weather, thus reducing diversions and cancellations and, in 

turn, enabling people and products to dependably reach the community. This 

is especially important for medical reasons and has provided our family with 

cancer care over the past year!! 

Simply put, Alaska Airlines' service is critical to the economic well being of 

Wrangell and the other communities. Our community, our church, and our 

family support the application to provide Essential Air Service to Southeast 

Alaska. 

Sincerely, 

Rev. Kemuel J Haggard 

Pastor Harbor Light Assembly of God 

U R <:/'d
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5217 

To suspend temporarily the duty on vibration dampeners. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2012 

Mr. MULVANEY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on vibration dampeners. 

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

3 SECTION 1. VIBRATION DAMPENERS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Vibration dampeners (provided for in subheading 

8487.90.00) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5217 IH

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS