alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ANNUAL REPORT
Chevy Chase Auto Receivables Trust 1997-4
$ 230,065,034.95 5.91% Auto Receivables Backed Certificates
For the Year Ended December 31, 1999




           PRINCIPAL    INTEREST      NET       NET        30 +      DELQ.
              DIST        DIST       LOSSES    LOSS %     DELQ.        %
          ____________ ___________ ___________ ________ ____________ _______
 Jan-1999   6,299,041     757,009   1,191,641    9.74%   16,250,312   11.07%
 Feb-1999   5,512,382     724,201     931,225    7.91%   15,518,290   10.98%
 Mar-1999   6,111,172     695,491     657,297    5.85%   12,806,718    9.50%
 Apr-1999   6,732,251     663,662     806,276    7.57%   10,958,271    8.57%
 May-1999   5,884,675     628,598     898,626    8.85%   10,356,477    8.50%
 Jun-1999   5,027,827     597,949     534,984    5.51%   10,579,398    9.08%
 Jul-1999   5,183,988     571,762     293,096    3.17%   10,549,323    9.51%
 Aug-1999   5,088,035     544,762     420,855    4.78%   10,965,669   10.38%
 Sep-1999   4,948,733     518,262     465,875    5.56%   11,298,293   11.24%
 Oct-1999   4,615,260     492,487     494,343    6.20%   11,327,150   11.84%
 Nov-1999   4,733,948     468,450     508,007    6.71%   11,799,654   12.99%
 Dec-1999   4,518,459     443,794     446,626    6.22%   11,506,336   13.36%
          ____________ ___________ ___________
   Totals  64,655,772   7,106,428   7,648,850

  **  The date represents the month of the Distribution date, the
      information is from activity of the previous month.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,382,772
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,755,453
<ALLOWANCES>                                   185,594
<INVENTORY>                                    172,395
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,262,086
<PP&E>                                       1,306,407
<DEPRECIATION>                                 767,932
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,317,917
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,381,354
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          250,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     8,058,415
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,317,917
<SALES>                                      8,229,127
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,583,816
<CGS>                                        7,031,336
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,481,787
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,686,760
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             188,279
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (767,217)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (767,217)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (767,217)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.21)
        

</TABLE>
1

Farquharson, Chenise

From: Wozniak, Gerald

Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 4:24 PM

To: Eric.P.Youngdale@DuPont.com

Cc: Mary.E.Koban@Dupont.com; Farquharson, Chenise

Subject: XP10, XP40 and XP44 Submissions

Hello,

My name is Gerald Wozniak and I am a case manager for EPA’s SNAP program. Chenise Farquharson who is also a case

manager is CC’d.

This email is in regards to your recent submissions for three Opteon XP chemicals. As stated on the submission form,

EPA requires the submitter “To assert a claim on this form, circle or bracket the information you claim as confidential

and mark the confidential box at the bottom of the page.”

See below for an example:

[The percentage breakdown is 43%]

In order for the EPA to continue review of your submissions, please re‐submit the CBI versions of the SNAP Information

Notice for each submission. Please let me know if you have any questions.  

Sincerely,

Gerald Wozniak

Environmental Engineer

Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program

U.S. EPA/ Stratospheric Protection Division

Tel. (202) 343‐9624

Email Wozniak.gerald@epa.gov
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 Quarterly Report of Western Power & Equipment Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark J.
Wright, 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:

     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/ Mark J. Wright
                                    -----------------------
                                    Name: Mark J. Wright
                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                    Date: June 14, 2004



     A signed original of the written statements required by Section 906 has
been provided to Western Power & Equipment Corp. and will be retained by Western
Power & Equipment Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3492 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3492

    To provide for the use of hand-propelled vessels in Yellowstone 
National Park, Grand Teton National Park, and the National Elk Refuge, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 14, 2013

    Mrs. Lummis (for herself and Mr. Bishop of Utah) introduced the 
    following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural 
                               Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To provide for the use of hand-propelled vessels in Yellowstone 
National Park, Grand Teton National Park, and the National Elk Refuge, 
                        and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``River Paddling Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. REGULATIONS SUPERSEDED.

    (a) In General.--The following regulations shall have no force or 
effect with regard to hand-propelled vessels and the Secretary of the 
Interior may not issue substantially similar regulations that apply to 
hand-propelled vessels:
            (1) Section 7.13(d)(4)(ii) of title 36, Code of Federal 
        Regulations, regarding vessels on streams and rivers in 
        Yellowstone National Park.
            (2) Section 7.22(e)(3) of title 36, Code of Federal 
        Regulations, regarding vessels on lakes and rivers in Grand 
        Teton National Park.
    (b) Wildlife-Dependent Recreational Use.--Notwithstanding section 
25.21(a) of title 50, Code of Federal Regulations, regarding National 
Elk Refuge, the use of hand-propelled vessels on rivers and streams in 
the National Elk Refuge shall be considered a ``wildlife-dependent 
recreational use'' as that term is defined in section 5(2) of Public 
Law 89-669 (16 U.S.C. 668ee(2)).
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.1
                                                                    ------------

                            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 Quarterly Report of Western Power & Equipment
Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended October 31,
2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, C. Dean McLain, President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

         (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.





/s/ C. Dean McLain
President and Chief Executive Officer
December 26, 2002
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                      AMERICAN BANK NOTE HOLOGRAPHICS, INC.

                             399 Executive Boulevard
                               Elmsford, NY 10523

               LETTER TO COMMISSION PURSUANT TO TEMPORARY NOTE 3T

                                 March 29, 2002


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549-0408

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Pursuant to Temporary Note 3T to Article 3 of Regulation S-X, American Bank Note
Holographics, Inc. has obtained a letter of representation from Arthur Andersen
LLP ("Andersen") stating that the December 31, 2001 audit was subject to their
quality control system for the U.S. accounting and auditing practice to provide
reasonable assurance that the engagement was conducted in compliance with
professional standards, that there was appropriate continuity of Andersen
personnel working on the audit and availability of national office consultation.
Availability of personnel at foreign affiliates of Andersen is not relevant to
this audit.

                                           Very truly yours,

                                           American Bank Note Holographics, Inc.

                                           /s/  Alan Goldstein
                                                Vice President and
                                                Chief Financial Officer
## Request for Additional Information - London Offshore Consultants 9-AWA-AVS-333Exemptions (FAA)

Dear Mr. Riggs:

This letter is to inform you that the following inform ation is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA-2015- 2645). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

• Describe the aircraft make(s), model(s), and type(s) (i.e., fixed wing, rotorcraft, li g hter than air) for the proposed UAS operation. The description(s) should in clude the maximum weight (including payload). This information can be located in the aircraft manual(s).

Please submit the additional information (non proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headqu arters or electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov . If you want us to process your request any fu rther, we must receive th e information described above by 9/24/15. If we do not receive the information, we will clos e the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

Jake J Troutman Program Analyst | Rulemaking FAA Office of Aviation Safety A irmen and Airspace Rules Division 202-267-9521

Thank you for your interest in aviation safety. FAA Office of Rulemaking Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 9:02 AM To: m.riggs@loc-group.com Cc: May, Rick (FAA) 

### Pa g e 1 of 1 Request for Additional Informatio n - London Offshore Consultants

9/9/2015 htt p s://email.dot. g ov/owa/9-AWA-AVS-333Exem p tions @ faa. g ov/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&

...
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-20103

Summary Calendar

L.F., by next friend Mary Ruffin; MARY RUFFIN,

Plaintiffs-Appellants

v.

HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; 

LARRY CRADDOCK; HANS GRAFF,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-MC-34

Before WIENER, ELROD, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mary Ruffin, personally and on behalf of L.F. (Collectively, “Plaintiffs”),

filed an Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400, et. seq.,

complaint and an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). The district

court screened the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and determined that

it was duplicative of complaints that Ruffin had previously filed. The court

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 11, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 12-20103 Document: 00511982037 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/11/2012
No. 12-20103

denied Plaintiffs’ motion to proceed IFP in the district court but granted leave

to proceed IFP on appeal.

The district court’s order denying leave to proceed IFP is a final,

appealable order. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 201 (5th Cir. 1997). An

action may be dismissed as malicious if it duplicates claims raised by the same

plaintiff in previous or pending litigation. Pittman v. Moore, 980 F.2d 994, 994-

95 (5th Cir. 1993). A dismissal as malicious pursuant to § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) is

reviewed for an abuse of discretion. See Ruiz v. United States, 160 F.3d 273, 275

(5th Cir. 1998).

The district court determined that the instant litigation was duplicative

of Southern District of Texas No. 4:06-cv-01306, referred to by the district court

as “H-06-cv-1306,” and Southern District of Texas No. 4:11-cv-00903, referred to

by the district court as “H-11-cv-903.” Plaintiffs assert 4:06-cv-01306 involved

a different child than does the instant litigation, but fail to address the district

court’s determination regarding No. 4:11-cv-00903, which involved the same

child. Plaintiffs’ failure to challenge the district court’s finding that the instant

litigation is duplicative of No. 4:11-cv-00903 constitutes an abandonment of any

challenge that they might have had to this determination. See Yohey v. Collins,

985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993); Brinkmann v. Dallas County DeputySheriff

Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Plaintiffs have failed to establish that

the district court’s ruling was an abuse of discretion. See Ruiz, 160 F.3d at 275.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 12-20103 Document: 00511982037 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/11/2012
EXHIBIT
        32.1
 
 CERTIFICATIONS
        PURSUANT
        TO
 SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 (18
        U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
  In
        connection with the Quarterly Report of Hyperdynamics Corporation
        (Hyperdynamics), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2007, as
        filed
        with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Kent P. Watts,
        Chief
        Executive Officer of Hyperdynamics, does hereby certify, pursuant to 906
        of the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that to his knowledge:
  (1)
        The
        Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
        the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
  (2)
        The
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
  
 Date:
        February 11, 2008
 
 By:
              /s/
                  Kent P. WattsKent
                  P. WattsChief
                  Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                                  Subsidiaries

The following are subsidiaries of ACT Manufacturing, Inc.:

Entity Name                                         Jurisdiction of Organization
-----------                                         ----------------------------
Advanced Component Technologies Limited                      Ireland
ACT Manufacturing Securities Corp.                        Massachusetts
CMC Industries, Inc.                                        Delaware

The following are subsidiaries of CMC Industries, Inc.:

Entity Name                                        Jurisdiction of Incorporation
-----------                                        -----------------------------
CMC Inmuebles, S.A. de C.V.                                  Mexico
CMC Industrias Hermosillo, S.A. de C.V.                      Mexico
Servicos y Administracion de Sonora, S.A. de C.V.            Mexico
CMC Industries, Inc. Taiwan Branch (U.S.A.)                  Taiwan
The Honorable Charles R. Wolle, Chief Judge, United States District Court for 1

the Southern District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 96-4232

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Southern District of Iowa.

Frank Baumgardner, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: November 21, 1997

 Filed: December 5, 1997

___________

Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

After a jury found Frank Baumgardner guilty of making a false statement to the

Social Security Administration (SSA), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (1994), and of

committing Social Security fraud, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 408(a)(4) (1994), the

District Court sentenced him to twenty-three months of imprisonment and three years 1

of supervised release. On appeal, this Court vacated Baumgardner&s false-statement
-2-

conviction and remanded for a new trial, but affirmed his Social Security fraud

conviction and remanded for resentencing on that count. See United States v.

Baumgardner, 85 F.3d 1305, 1308-10, 1310-11 (8th Cir. 1996). On remand, the court

granted the government&s motion to dismiss the false-statement count; the parties

stipulated that Baumgardner should be resentenced based solely on the amount of loss

attributable to his Social Security fraud conviction, which resulted in a Guidelines

imprisonment range of twelve to eighteen months; and the court sentenced

Baumgardner to fourteen months of imprisonment and three years of supervised

release. Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), arguing that the court should have sentenced Baumgardner to twelve months

of imprisonment. We affirm.

Because Baumgardner does not challenge the legal basis for his sentence or the

applicable Guidelines range of twelve to eighteen months, and the sentence the court

imposed is within that range, we conclude that the issue counsel raises is unreviewable.

See 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) (1994); United States v. Woodrum, 959 F.2d 100, 101 (8th

Cir. 1992) (per curiam).

In accordance with Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we have reviewed

the record and find no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-18-00236-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.S., A CHILD §

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 323rd District Court

of Tarrant County (323-106105-17)

January 17, 2019

Opinion by Justice Kerr

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By __/s/ Elizabeth Kerr_________________

 Justice Elizabeth Kerr
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S ANNUAL
REPORT AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          37,459
<SECURITIES>                                   101,096
<RECEIVABLES>                                   51,527
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,471
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               201,139
<PP&E>                                          33,534
<DEPRECIATION>                                  18,656
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 238,515
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           60,247
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     178,204
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   238,515
<SALES>                                         93,785
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               156,299
<CGS>                                            4,594
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   30,941
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                29,640
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  62
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 26,857
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,863
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    17,994
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.59


</TABLE>