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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
FORM 10-Q FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                      13,027,736
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,353,989
<ALLOWANCES>                                   111,587
<INVENTORY>                                 11,703,771
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            28,917,626
<PP&E>                                       5,272,031
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,429,843
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              59,049,941
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,756,237
<BONDS>                                      9,687,963
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        44,306
<OTHER-SE>                                  44,076,488
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                59,049,941
<SALES>                                     23,964,189
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            24,603,638
<CGS>                                       13,726,816
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               13,726,816
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             9,095,349
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               150,903
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             648,486
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,781,472
<INCOME-TAX>                                   675,706
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,105,766
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,105,766
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.25


</TABLE>
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

REETCHADLIE LEBRUN

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 2447

[ May 16, 2019 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County ; Thomas J. Coleman , Judge; L.T. Case No. 12

- 14492

CF10A

.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Mara C. Herbert, Assistant

Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Alexandra A.

Folley, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

D AMOORGIAN

, L EVINE and K LINGENSMITH , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5723 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5723

 To suspend temporarily the duty on Yttrium europium oxide for use in 
                  the production of fluorescent lamps.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 10, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend temporarily the duty on Yttrium europium oxide for use in 
                  the production of fluorescent lamps.

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

SECTION 1. YTTRIUM EUROPIUM OXIDE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        Yttrium oxide       Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          phosphor,                                                         12/31/2015
                          activated by
                          europium used as
                          a luminophore
                          (CAS No. 68585-82-
                          0) (provided for
                          in subheading
                          3206.50.00)......

    (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>
```
EXHIBIT
31.1





CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER





I, Gerald
McIlhargey, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-K of St. Joseph, Inc.;





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





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 and results of operations of the issuer as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;





4. The
issuer’s other signing officer and I:





(a)    are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures;





(b)    have
designed such internal controls to ensure that material information relating to
the issuer and its consolidated subsidiaries is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;





(c)    have
evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer’s internal controls as of ninety days
prior to the report; and





(d)   have
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of our internal
controls based on our evaluation as of the end of the period covered by this
report;





5. The
issuer’s other signing officer and I have disclosed to the issuer’s auditors and
the audit committee of the issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing
the equivalent functions):





(a)   
all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize
and report financial data and have identified for the issuer’s auditors any
material weaknesses in internal controls; and





(b)   
any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the issuer’s internal controls; and





6.  The
issuer’s other signing officer and I have indicated in the report whether or not
there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that
could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of their
evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.





Date:
      March 31, 2009
              /s/ GERALD MCILHARGEYGerald
      McIlhargeyPresident
      and Chief Executive
Officer
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.5
PHH MORTGAGE SERVICES

                  [PHH LOGO]

February 25, 2005

Sequoia Residential Funding, Inc.
One Belvedere Place, Suite 330
Mill Valley, CA 94941

HSBC Bank USA
452 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10018

RE: Annual Statement as to Compliance

Investor number(s)/Deal name(s): 168/ SEQUOIA 20O3-6

Dear Investor, Master Servicer or Trustee,

The undersigned officer certifies the following for PHH Mortgage Corp. f/k/a
Cendant Mortgage Corp., for the 2004 calendar year. To the best of our
knowledge:

      a)    The activities and performances of the Servicer during the preceding
            Fiscal year under the terms of the above Servicing Agreement, Trust
            Agreement, Pooling and Servicing Agreement and/or Servicer Guide and
            to the best of my knowledge the Servicer has fulfilled all of its
            duties, responsibilities or obligations under this Agreement
            throughout such year, or if there has been default or failure of the
            Servicer to perform any such duties, responsibilities or
            obligations, a description of each default or failure and the nature
            and status thereof has been reported to HSBC Bank USA;

      b)    The Servicer is currently an approved FNMA or FHLMC Servicer in good
            standing;

      c)    The Fidelity Bond, the Errors and Omissions Insurance Policy and any
            other bonds required under the terms of the Servicing Agreement,
            Trust Agreement, Pooling and Servicing Agreement and/or Servicer
            Guide are in full force and effect:

      d)    All premiums for each Hazard Insurance Policy, Flood Insurance
            Policy (if applicable) and Primary Mortgage Insurance Policy (if
            applicable), with respect to each Mortgaged Property, have been paid
            and that such insurance policies are in full force and effect;

      e)    All real estate taxes, governmental assessments and any other
            expenses accrued and due, that if not paid could result in a lien or
            encumbrance on any Mortgage Property, have been paid, or if any such
            costs or expenses have been paid with respect to any Mortgaged
            Property, the reason for the non-payment has been reported to HSBC
            Bank USA;

      f)    All Custodial Accounts have been reconciled and are properly funded;
            and

      g)    All annual reports of Foreclosure and Abandonment of Mortgaged
            Property required per section 6050H, 6050J and 6050P of the Internal
            Revenue Code, respectively, have been prepared and filed.

Certified by

/s/ William E. Fricke, Jr.
--------------------------
William E. Fricke, Jr.
Assistant Vice President
FEB 25, 2005

Date: February 25, 2005
#### James McLANE, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 22434.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 10, 1943.

Fred Whitaker, of Carthage, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was assessed a penalty of one year in the penitentiary on a charge of failing to stop and render aid.

This is a companion case to Henry D. Mimms v. State, 169 S.W.2d 165 this day decided. The parties were jointly indicted but separately tried. The facts are in all respects substantially the same. The questions of law presented are identical.

For the reasons stated in the Mimms case, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
EXHIBIT
31.2





CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER





I,
Kenneth L. Johnson, certify that:





1. I have
reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-K of St. Joseph, Inc.;





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





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 and results of operations of the issuer as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;





4. The
issuer’s other signing officer and I:





(a) are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures;





(b)   
have designed such internal controls to ensure that material information
relating to the issuer and its consolidated subsidiaries is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this
report is being prepared;





(c)   
have evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer’s internal controls as of ninety
days prior to the report; and





(d)   
have presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of our
internal controls based on our evaluation as of the end of the period covered by
this report;





5. The
issuer’s other signing officer and I have disclosed to the issuer’s auditors and
the audit committee of the issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing
the equivalent functions):





(a)   
all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize
and report financial data and have identified for the issuer’s auditors any
material weaknesses in internal controls; and





(b)   
any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the issuer’s internal controls; and





6.  The
issuer’s other signing officer and I have indicated in the report whether or not
there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that
could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of their
evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.





Date:
      March 31, 2009
              /s/ KENNETH L. JOHNSONKenneth
      L. JohnsonTreasurer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           3,076
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   46,783
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                49,859
<PP&E>                                      14,999,477
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,087)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,048,249
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,558,994
<BONDS>                                        575,716
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,224,784
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,688,756
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,048,249
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               176,259
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             429,226
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (605,485)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              2,056,474
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,450,989
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 14, 2015

No. 04-15-00214-CV

IN RE Juan Miguel MATA

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

On May 8, 2015, relator Juan Miguel Mata, filed a motion for extension of time to file a 

motion for rehearing. The motion is GRANTED. Any motion for rehearing on behalf of relator 

should be filed in this court no later than June 8, 2015.

It is so ORDERED on May 14, 2015.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: _____________________________

Keith E. Hottle, Clerk

 

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2714, styled In the Matter of Maria Elena Mata and Juan Miguel Mata, 

pending in the County Court, Dimmit County, Texas, the Honorable Francisco G. Ponce presiding.
EXHIBIT L 

 

Case 6:20-cv-00505-ADA Document 27-12 Filed 11/05/20 Page 1 of 4


	
 
	
 	



 !" !

#$%
&'(
%')#*+,
-&'
'+*$
.

'+&'%''		
-'%

&
%'.
'+

%&'$/#'*$
	

'	+
,
'+
01

2$*$'3/$4$#'+5-6'5
0

7  !89

:&')#	;$$/&$
2
',#
*#,&*
0

<'-

=>?!!> 

@)$)&%&,	*'/

-$%#'+
-
#	

')#*+0

<'-

>!

:;&&$03&-
	,#*#+'/&$



'+%&'/$+2+
0

<'-

A?!

B9C>8 8D

	


EHIAEJ AJKIFAG I==EF EFG

Case 6:20-cv-00505-ADA Document 27-12 Filed 11/05/20 Page 2 of 4


	







 ! !"#""!$% &"$ !$!'!"!%!#

!($%$)"(  "" $' !%*%!%$)+

,-
.
/

0"(( "$'%&!%"$($"1"''" "1("*2%&!"2%& ""(

&"**"$' "( (%!#"2(#(+

3./4-45	



6"(78"( %$"$+""&$&#"" 1("* %$)9!%$)9

(%!%$)"( 7%$)+

6!( 

	

:	



 45	
	


;..<-	
-


=$!!"%$!"'$)) !!# *!%*>?"("8'*+  ( &$$"$!("( 1("*!"'$)) !"$&+

@..<@	<-	<

 ( &$$""!%$!" !!"!%!#!($%$)"( '%7

AB*8(8!&#+AC D%2%$)D$))1!()!#( $! 

 (%&!%"$(% %!#!#'! !)'"8'!($%$)"( 8&("E

 "(&%$)!#'$))+F"!"!!%$) GD$))H!%"$ $

$8'D%2%$)D$))!"8%$!#7$"+

I	<./
	
.

J()"$C "('E($"$2"%&(&")$%!%"$'! ")"#$ E1($

!($ "(2"%&!"!K!L%&7'$&&(!'%!# %*'( "1

!#J()"$1'*+M$%1"' "#$!"8J()"$N"8%'

M % !$!9 %*'1("*!#O!"!#J()"$6'*"$

!#78"($2"%'P0"(( "$'*"8%' % !$!% !"(

&"**$+

3
	./
.	5	/4-	
/

8&7 $ $& ( "$'%&!%"$(% &(" *'!%'

*"8%'2%& +"$"#$$%&7$* '%7AH''%A(!"

*"8%'#"$9!#!"(%''8!"*!%&''!"!#( "$'

%&!%"$("$!8'! '' ''"!#(()% !(2%& +

Q@TUQV UVITRUS T33QR QRS

Case 6:20-cv-00505-ADA Document 27-12 Filed 11/05/20 Page 3 of 4


	

	     
		

 !!

" !

#$%$#%#&
'(	)'

	#%		'$*#+

#,,		'-'.

/0!1203 0040


+#%#'5#-6	&%+#	,+,7	+&

*6	#&-6	$,$	'+,$-6	

+	%'	.

8 2  90!


#$	+	:;+,#,	<=	+%&

	&>		,'.

"2440!

?>$$+.@*A#BC-+-$#,$#


#%A#+-	A#&	+	

*	$+#,$'#
.

D2440!

EFCGG(

'**

H*

C#
%#

G



I$G#%

EJFKL FMMGHCH(


?$>G)6+,

N*+

(*


IIFOC

I	#%#

@+$%#

%#

PQRS T<=<=G#%''#%&H%.++,$*	.UJ,+U
MUI*%+%U%%6+U
#6%

"W8ZV[W\" [\]Z"VX[Y" "Z^^WXV "VWXY

Case 6:20-cv-00505-ADA Document 27-12 Filed 11/05/20 Page 4 of 4
#### John Van Grembergen, Appellant, v State of New York, Respondent.

Motion to vacate dismissal of appeal granted on condition appeal is perfected on or before January 8, 1991. Memorandum: Although claimant’s excuse for the delay is weak, we note that the abandonment was recent. We strongly advise all appellate counsel that the prudent practice is to move to extend the time to perfect the appeal before the nine-month period has expired *(see,*22 NYCRR 1000.3 [b] [2] [i]). Present—Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ. (Order entered Nov. 8,1990.)
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-50762

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PATRICK CLARK,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. A-97-CV-337-SS 

(A-94-CR-100-1-SS)

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

December 21, 2001

Before DeMOSS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Patrick Clark appeals the district court’s denial of his

motion for release on bail pending the disposition of his 28

U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Regardless of the merits of Clark’s

pending 28 U.S.C. § 2255 claim, on which the district court has

not yet ruled, Clark has failed to show the existence of

exceptional circumstances necessitating his release on bail in

order to make the post-conviction remedy effective. See Calley

v. Callaway, 496 F.2d 701, 702 (5th Cir. 1974). 

AFFIRMED.
#### ZUMMO v. STATE.

No. 22599.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 10, 1943.

Wilder & Ippolito, of Beaumont, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

The prosecution originated in the Justice of the Peace Court in Jefferson County, where appellant was convicted for violating the Pure Food Law. He appealed to the County Court at Law of Jefferson County and upon trial there was again convicted and his punishment assessed at a fine of $100. It is from this conviction in the County Court that appellant attempts to prosecute this appeal.

Our State’s Attorney has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that under the provision of Art. 53, C.C.P., this court has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Said article reads as follows: “The Court of Criminal Appeals shall have appellate jurisdiction co-extensive with the limits of the State in all criminal cases. This article shall not be so construed as to embrace any case which has been appealed from any inferior court to the county court or county court at law, in which the fine imposed by the county court or county court at law shall not exceed one hundred dollars.” See Grigsby v. State, 79 Tex.Cr.R. 84, 183 S.W. 143; Foard v. State, 79 Tex.Cr.R. 330, 185 S.W. 570; Ex parte Largent, 144 Tex.Cr.R. 592, 162 S.W.2d 419. The statute in question has been passed upon so many times we only refer for collation of cases to Vol. 1, Vernon’s Tex.C.C. P. under said Art. 53; Branch’s Ann.Tex. P.C.,Sec. 409; Sec.15, p. 30, Vol. 4, Tex. Jur.

It is the contention of appellant that the complaint under which he was prosecuted charged no offense against the law, and while admitting that this court has no jurisdiction to review the facts it does have jurisdiction to determine the validity of the complaint. In the present procedure it is a question of jurisdiction. This court either has it, or it does not. If it has no jurisdiction it is without power to do anything but dismiss the appeal. The appeal in Colf v. State, 81 Tex.Cr.R. 25, 193 S.W. 148, was dismissed for want of jurisdiction. In the opinion is found this statement, “We are without authority to pass on the important questions discussed in the briefs on file, but must, in obedience to the statute, dismiss the appeal.” Our attention was attracted by the language quoted, and *90an examination of the original record in that case reveals that one of the questions attempted to be raised was that the complaint under which Coif was prosecuted charged no offense.

The State’s motion is sustained and the appeal is dismissed.
### NUMBER 13

- 10

- 00 290

- CV


## COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

IN THE INTEREST OF J.N.L., A MINOR CHILD

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Yañez and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, Cynthia L. Salazar , perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the County Court at Law No. 2 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CC

- 502

- 96

- 2

. Appellant ha s filed a motion to dismiss the appeal and request s that this Court dismiss the appeal. The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant = s motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(a) . Appellant = s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby2

DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See T EX

. R. A PP

. 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

D elivered and filed the 29th day of July , 20 10

.