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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF THE COMPANY AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1997
<CASH>                                      40,227,769
<SECURITIES>                                25,100,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               59,569,239
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,677,948
<INVENTORY>                                 73,402,462
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,546,832
<PP&E>                                      63,851,139
<DEPRECIATION>                              17,830,492
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             254,142,316
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       60,811,031
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,177,464
<OTHER-SE>                                 188,776,601
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               254,142,316
<SALES>                                     95,807,047
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            97,811,234
<CGS>                                       51,488,057
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               51,488,057
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             12,784,312
<INCOME-TAX>                                 5,113,725
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          7,670,587
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 7,670,587
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.18
        

</TABLE>
Order entered January 6 , 2023

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 22

- 0050 8

- CR

COLIN TYLER WOMACK , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219

- 824 90

- 2021

O RDER

The State’s motion for extension of time to file its brief is GRANTED , and

we ORDER the brief received January 4, 2023, FILED as of the date of this order.

/s/ DENNIS E GARCIA JUSTICE
Exhibit 32.2








CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the report of Worldwide Biotech & Pharmaceutical Company (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Peng Wang, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:





(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 results of operations of the Company.











/s/ Peng Wang


Peng Wang


Chief Financial Officer


November 15, 2010
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5440 

To reduce temporarily the rate of duty on Boscalid. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To reduce temporarily the rate of duty on Boscalid. 

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

3 SECTION 1. BOSCALID. 

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 2-chloro-N-(4′-chlorobiphenyl-2-yl)-nicotinamide 

(Boscalid) (CAS No. 

188425–85–6) (provided 

for in subheading 

2933.39.21) ....................... 4.9% No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5440 IH

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

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

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

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA CAUSE NO. DA 2 2 - 0404 STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Appellee , v. TYLIN JAMES WEBER ,

Defendant and Appellant . **ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s mo tion for extension of t ime, an d good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 1 , 2023, wi thin which to prepare, file, an d serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

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

May 30 2023

05/30/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0404
#### MOODY v. STATE.

No. 25324.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 30, 1951.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

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

*312BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Upon his plea of “guilty” before the court, a jury having been waived, appellant was found guilty of the offense of driving while intoxicated. This being the second offense, his punishment was assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for one year.

The record is before this court without either a statement of facts or bill of exception. All proceedings appear regular. No question being presented for review, the judgment is affirmed
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct Of 2002**

**(18 U.S.C. § 1350)**

 

 

Inconnection with the quarterly report of SouthWest Water Company (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 (the “Report”),I, David Stanton, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350), that:

 

1)             to my knowledge, the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2)             the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated:  August 3, 2009 | /s/   DAVID STANTON |
|-----------------------------|--------------------------|
|                        | David Stanton            |
|                        | Chief Financial Officer  |
#### Thomas N. Piccini, Plaintiff, *v.*John Myers, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County,

November 26, 1957.

*170
      *Frank Delaney*and *Hugo S. Wend*for plaintiff.

*William G. Mulligan, Louis Goldstein*and *Jacob Gerstein*for defendant.

Saul S. Stbeit, J.

This is a motion to dismiss two causes of action in libel.

The first cause is based on a statement, in an affidavit by defendant, that plaintiff was an ex-convict, accompanied by a photograph of plaintiff with numbers across his shoulder. Although there is no allegation in the present pleading that the affidavit was filed in a judicial proceeding, the brief submitted by plaintiff indicates that it was. Furthermore, the original complaint so alleged, and the language quoted from the affidavit tends to confirm this, for it purports to answer ‘ ‘ two of the three supporting affidavits submitted by ” affiant’s “ wife ”. A paper submitted by *plaintiff’s*attorney, in opposition to the motion, indicates that the affidavit was filed by defendant “ in the case of Myers v. Myers, Supreme Court, New York County For the purposes of this motion, the court will, therefore, treat the defamatory statement as having been made in the course of a judicial proceeding.

If defamatory language is used in the course of a judicial proceeding, the person publishing it enjoys an *absolute*privilege, provided that the words “ may *possibly*be pertinent ” *(People ex rel. Bensky*v. *Warden,*258 N. Y. 55, 59). “ It is only when the language used goes beyond the bounds of reason and is so clearly impertinent and needlessly defamatory *as not to admit of discussion*that the privilege is lost ” *(People ex rel. Bensky*v. *Warden, supra,*p. 59; italics supplied). It is clear from the very language complained of that its purpose was to impeach the credibility of plaintiff, whose affidavit had been submitted by defendant’s wife, by charging him with conviction of a crime. It was, therefore, not impertinent, and, a fortiori, not so clearly impertinent “ as not to admit of discussion”. Doubts as to pertinency are to be resolved in favor of the defendant (Seel*171man on New York Law of Libel and Slander, § 199 and eases there cited).

Since the defect appears on the face of the cause of action, it may be dismissed as insufficient *(Chapman*v. *Dick,*197 App. Div. 551, 554; *Fulton*v. *Ingalls,*165 App. Div. 323; *Tierney*v. *Ruppert,*150 App. Div. 863; *Corwin*v. *Berkwitz,*190 App. Div. 952).

The second cause of action is likewise insufficient, for the same reason. It is based on the photographs submitted with defendant’s affidavit, which depicted plaintiff as a convict, or were reasonably susceptible of that interpretation. The cause of action is insufficient for the further reason that the photographs are not made part of the cause of action. It is elementary that, in an action of libel or slander, the defamatory words must be alleged in *hcec verba.*If the defamation is accomplished by photographs, they should be made part of the cause of action. The motion to dismiss is granted.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Frank F. Ferola, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of The Stephan Co.;

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 we 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
small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):

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.

Date: January 10, 2008


/s/ Frank F. Ferola
----------------------------------------
Frank F. Ferola
Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rafael Delgado, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, *182New York County (Franklin Weissberg, J.), rendered October 11, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted assault in the second degree and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to establish that he intended to inflict serious physical injury upon his victim. To the contrary, the evidence at trial showed that defendant and his accomplice punched and kicked the victim numerous times about the head and body, and that the victim suffered a concussion and experienced pain for two weeks after the assault. Even if serious injury were not inflicted, "[t]he mere fortuity that a physical injury was not inflicted is no defense to the charges of attempted assault” *(People v Early,*85 AD2d 752, 753).

Similarly, the prosecutor’s argument in summation that the victim fortuitously did not suffer more grievous injuries was responsive to the defense claim that there had been no attempt to cause serious physical injury. Nor were other portions of the summation beyond the proper scope of fair comment.

The trial court did not shift the burden of proof or unfairly marshal the evidence in its charge. Any potential for confusion in the court’s charge on the appropriate inference to be drawn when more than one inference could be drawn was eliminated by the charge, read as a whole. *(People v Getch,*50 NY2d 456.) The prosecutor’s burden and the reasonable doubt standard were correctly conveyed to the jury. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Ross, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with this Quarterly Report of The Colonial BancGroup, Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended on March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) and to which this certification is furnished as an exhibit, I, Sarah H. Moore, the principal
financial officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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) 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 results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 9, 2007



/s/    SARAH H.
MOORESarah H. Moore Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
to The Colonial BancGroup, Inc. and will be retained by The Colonial BancGroup, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
NUMBER 13-12-00710-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

JACKIE BURKE, Appellant,

v.

ETS OILFIELD SERVICES, L.P., Appellee. 

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4

of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Jackie Burke, filed an appeal from a judgment entered by the County 

Court at Law No. 4 of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 2012-CCV-60320-4. 

Appellant has filed an unopposed motion to withdraw the appeal and requests that this 

Court withdraw the appeal.
2

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant=s unopposed 

motion to withdraw the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a). Appellant=s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is 

hereby DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d) 

("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). 

Having dismissed the appeal at appellant=s request, no motion for rehearing will be 

entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

17th day of January, 2013.
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 44977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18988]

[[Page 44977]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7535]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Nobility and Virtue: Masterpieces of Ming Loyalist 
Art From the Chih Lo Lou Collection''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority 
No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Nobility and Virtue: Masterpieces of Ming 
Loyalist Art from the Chih Lo Lou Collection,'' imported from abroad 
for temporary exhibition within the United States, are of cultural 
significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with 
the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that the exhibition 
or display of the exhibit objects at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 
New York, New York, from on or about September 6, 2011, until on or 
about January 2, 2012, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues 
yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that 
Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the Federal 
Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: July 20, 2011.
J. Adam Ereli,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2011-18988 Filed 7-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 202 (Wednesday, October 18, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 62340]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26686]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP01-30-000]


Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

October 12, 2000.
    Take notice that on October 5, 2000, Eastern Shore Natural Gas 
Company (ESNG) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
Second Revised Volume No. 1, certain revised tariff sheets, bear a 
proposed effective date of November 1, 2000.
    ESNG states that the purpose of this instant filing is to track 
rate changes attributable to storage services purchased from Columbia 
Gas Transmission Corporation (Columbia) under its Rate Schedule CFSS. 
The costs of the above referenced storage services comprise the rates 
and charges payable under ESNG's Rate Schedule CFSS. This tracking 
filing is being made pursuant to Section 3 of ESNG's Rate Schedule 
CFSS.
    ESNG states that copies of the filing have been served upon its 
jurisdictional customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-26686 Filed 10-17-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M