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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD INDICATED AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                       4,162,845
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,074,112
<ALLOWANCES>                                   138,000
<INVENTORY>                                  2,245,338
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,287,720
<PP&E>                                      30,433,014
<DEPRECIATION>                              16,279,745
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              29,451,672
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,629,549
<BONDS>                                      3,945,550
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       135,722
<OTHER-SE>                                  18,475,373
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                29,451,672
<SALES>                                     41,809,938
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            41,809,938
<CGS>                                       30,453,432
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               30,453,432
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               158,424
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (68,517)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             642,169
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,994,941
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,212,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,782,941
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,782,941
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .62
        

</TABLE>
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-21-00497-CR

The STATE of Texas,

Appellant

v.

Hugo MARQUEZ,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 13, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 600721

Honorable Rosie S. Gonzalez, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARTINEZ, JUSTICE ALVAREZ, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. 

SIGNED December 22, 2021.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1359

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that individuals

who are required to leave their employment because of certain medical

or family reasons will not be denied unemployment compensation when

they are ready to return to work.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 16, 1993

Mrs. MINK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide

that individuals who are required to leave their employment because of certain medical or family reasons will

not be denied unemployment compensation when they

are ready to return to work.

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

3 That (a) subsection (a) of section 3304 of the Internal

4 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to approval of State un5 employment compensation laws) is amended by striking

6 ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (17), by redesignating
2

•HR 1359 IH

1 paragraph (18) as paragraph (19), and by inserting after

2 paragraph (17) the following new paragraph:

3 ‘‘(18)(A) if any individual leaves employment

4 for a qualified family-related reason, for purposes of

5 determining such individual’s eligibility for com6 pensation for any subsequent week for which such

7 individual meets the State law requirements relating

8 to availability for work and active search for work—

9 ‘‘(i) such individual shall be treated as

10 leaving such employment for good cause, and

11 ‘‘(ii) any failure while the qualified family12 related reason continues to return to such em13 ployment or to otherwise meet such State law

14 requirements shall be disregarded,

15 ‘‘(B) for purposes of subparagraph (A), the

16 term ‘qualified family reason’ means any cir17 cumstance which entitles the individual to unpaid

18 leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act of

19 1993 (or would entitle the individual to such leave

20 if the individual’s employer were subject to the re21 quirements of such Act) whether or not the individ22 ual returns to employment after the leave to which

23 such individual is (or would be entitled); and’’.
3

•HR 1359 IH

1 (b)(1) Except as provided by paragraph (2), the

2 amendment made by subsection (a) shall take effect on

3 November 1, 1993.

4 (2) In the case of any State the legislature of which

5 has not been in session for at least 30 calendar days

6 (whether or not successive) between the date of the enact7 ment of this Act and November 1, 1993, the amendment

8 made by subsection (a) shall take effect 30 calendar days

9 after the first day on which such legislature is in session

10 on or after November 1, 1993.

Æ
Exhibit 32.1

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 Annual Report of RadiSys Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Scott C. Grout, 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:

(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/ SCOTT C. GROUT     
|Scott C. Grout         
|Chief Executive Officer
|February 27, 2008
#### McCOY et al. v. STATE.

No. 19751.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 25, 1938.

Motion to Reinstate Appeal and Petition for Rehearing Denied June 15, 1938.

P. S. Kouri, John Davenport, and W. T. Locke, all of Wichita Falls, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

MORROW, Presiding Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment final on a bond forfeiture in the District Court of Lampasas County.

The transcript fails to contain any judgment making the forfeiture final, nor does it contain any notice of appeal. Under the circumstances, this court has no choice other than to order a dismissal of the appeal, and it is so ordered.

On Appellants’ Motion to Reinstate the Appeal.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

Since the opinion was delivered dismissing the appeal a certified copy of the *462judgment making the forfeiture of the bond final has been brought forward. Also it is made to appear that proper notice of appeal was given. However, no brief has been filed in this court and we fail to find a waiver by the state of such filing. Under the circumstances, we would not be warranted in reinstating the appeal. It is the uniform holding of this" court that in cases such as this a brief must be filed in this court, or a waiver of such filing must appear of record. Belton v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 110 S.W.2d 913.

The motion to reinstate the appeal is overruled.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.