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

<ARTICLE>                         5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                           JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          3998
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   2545
<ALLOWANCES>                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                    58557
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               67585
<PP&E>                                         58784
<DEPRECIATION>                                 23163
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                123668
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          28736
<BONDS>                                         4778
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                          92
<OTHER-SE>                                     85234
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  123668
<SALES>                                        60166
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               60166
<CGS>                                          33328
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  33328
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               25382
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               646
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  851
<INCOME-TAX>                                     338
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              513
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                     513
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0.06


</TABLE>
# L_2011260EN.01001301.xml

| 5.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 260/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 260/13

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 987/2011

of 30 September 2011

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Nanoški sir (PDO)]

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Slovenia’s application to register the name ‘Nanoški sir’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Slovenia’s application to register the name ‘Nanoški sir’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 September 2011.

For the Commission, On behalf of the President,

Dacian CIOLOȘ

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 340, 15.12.2010, p. 28.

2

---

ANNEX

Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.3.   Cheeses

SLOVENIA

Nanoški sir (PDO)

---
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 Tiger  Telematics,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-K for the period ended  November 31, 2003,  as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned  Chief Executive  Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that based on his 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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report.


/S/  Michael W. Carrender
--------------------------------------
Michael W. Carrender, Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer

March 30, 2005
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, December 12, 2019. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, December 12, 2019 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A20D0170. RAILROAD OUTDOOR, LLC v. THE CITY OF STONECREST, GEORGIA et al.
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 18CV7587
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 482 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 482

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the increase in 
                  the tax on social security benefits.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 25, 1999

   Mr. Abraham (for himself, Mr. Lott, Mr. Ashcroft, Mr. Helms, Mr. 
Inhofe, Mr. Bunning, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Cochran, and Mr. Mack) introduced 
the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 
                               on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the increase in 
                  the tax on social security benefits.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF INCREASE IN TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 86(a) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to social security and tier 1 railroad 
retirement benefits) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
flush sentence:
        ``This paragraph shall not apply to any taxable year beginning 
        after December 31, 1999.''
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1999.
                                 <all>
```
### IIG Emission Data

1/26/2012

Testing **COS Formaldehyde**  **Formaldehyde Phenol**  **Phenol Methanol**  **Methanol HF**  **HCL**

Lab Cupola Oven Collection Oven Collection Oven Collection Cupola Cupola

BTEC lbs/ToM 0.00079 0.04600 0.00039 0.00011 0.01100 0.00870

**Test Date:**

Weston lbs/ToM 0.00232 0.15540 0.12080

**Test Date:**

Weston lbs-hr 0.54680 0.02763 0.31734 4.52640 0.11428 1.50880 0.05400 0.04500

Weston lbs-hr 0.68122 0.02763 0.18780 3.56490 0.11967 1.21780 0.04600 0.04600

Weston lbs-hr 0.71998 0.02874 0.13853 4.01240 0.12252 1.23800 0.06500 0.03600

EPA lbs/ToM 3.30000 0.06700 0.06700 0.00230 0.00230 0.00077 0.00077 0.01400 0.00960
EX-32.1 4
digitaltown10k022809ex32-1.htm CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER UNDER
SECTION 1350   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   I, Paul R. Gramstad,
the Chief Financial Officer Officer of DigitalTown, Inc. (the "Company") in
compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that, the Company's Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the period ended February 28, 2010, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.     Date:   May
28, 2010
Signed:
/s/
Paul R.
GramstadName:
Paul R.
GramstadTitle:
Chief
Financial Officer,
Principal
Financial Officer     EX-32.1 4
digitaltown10k022809ex32-1.htm CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER UNDER
SECTION 1350   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   I, Richard A. Pomije,
the Chief Executive Officer of DigitalTown, Inc. (the "Company") in compliance
with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that, the Company's Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the period ended February 28, 2010, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.     Date:   May
28, 2010
Signed:
/s/
Richard A.
PomijeName:
Richard A.
PomijeTitle:
Chief
Executive Officer
Principal
Executive Officer
Order filed June 4, 2019

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 19

- 00350

- CV

____________ JIMMY GETTINGS , Appellant

V. DARLENE BOUNDS, GRAD Y GETTINGS, BELVA GETTINGS, CHURCH OF CHRIST, MILL ROAD , OF DURHAM, NORTH C AROLINA, CHURCH OF CHRIST OF CAMPIONS OF HOUSTON, TEXAS

DOES 1

- 25 , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 189th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2018

- 02794



### ORDER
On May 13, 2019, appellant filed a statement of inability to afford payment
of court costs in this case. This court deemed appellant indigent for purposes of the appellate filing fee only on May 21, 2019

. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1. This court further informed appellant tha t to obtain the clerk’s record without payment of costs,a party must file a statement of inability to afford payment of court costs in the trial

court. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 145. No response has been filed.
Accordingly, appellant is ordered to provide proof to this court that he has made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record or has filed a statement of inability to afford payment of court costs pursuant to Rule 145 of the Texas Rules of Civil
Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c). Such proof must be fi led by June 14, 2019

. If appellant fails to comply with this order , the appeal may be dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).

PER CURIAM
#### W. S. Smith, Appellant, v. E. C. Foster, Sheriff, Appellee.

Appeal: former adjudication.

*Appeal from an order of D. B. Hindman, District Judge, sitting in Marshall Gotmty.*

Proceeding by *habeas corpus.*The plaintiff, at the time referred to in the record, was a resident of Marshall county. The defendant is the sheriff of Tama county. In February, 1890, the plaintiff was indicted by the grand jury of Tama county, and charged with having committed a nuisance by placing or depositing in Linn creek, in Marshall county, a large quantity of filth, offal, acids and poisonous substances, which were by the waters of Linn creek carried into the waters of the Iowa river, in Marshall county, and by the flow of said river into Tama county, whereby the waters of the Iowa river in Tama county became corrupted, and were rendered unwholesome and impure. By proceedings pursuant to the indictment the plaintiff was arrested by the defendant, as said sheriff, and confined in the jail of Tama county. To test the legality of said imprisonment the writ of *habeas corpus*in this proceeding was issued by Hon. D. R. Hindman. At the hearing pursuant to the writ the issues were such that the validity of the instrument was questioned in several particulars, and among them, *first,*that the district court of Tama county had no jurisdiction of the offense charged in the indictment; *second,*that the indictment did not charge an indictable offense. The trial judge, at the conclusion of the hearing, made the following findings and order: "I find that I have no authority for determining whether or not the district court of Tama county, Iowa, has jurisdiction' to fully try and determine the alleged crime set out in the indictment, and for that reason the bill for the discharge of the complainant is hereby dismissed, and the complainant is is hereby remanded to the custody of the sheriff of-Tama county, Iowa.” From this order the plaintiff- *appealed.*

Affirmed.

*706
      *J. L. Carney,*for appellant.

Granger, J.

The indictment referred to in the statement of the ease has been tried in Tama county, resulting in a verdict and judgment against the plaintiff in this suit, and on appeal to this court the judgment of the district court was affirmed. *State v. Smith,*82 Iowa, 423. The ground upon which it is urged in this proceeding that the district court of Tama county was without jurisdiction of the offense charged in the indictment is that the act constituting the offense was done or committed in Marshall county, and that upon which it is urged that the indictment does not charge an indictable offense is that the acts do not constitute “a public or common nuisance.” These questions upon the grounds urged are ruled and settled adversely to the appellant in the appeal referred to, and they are the only questions to be considered.

This case was submitted before the determination of the appeal, which probably accounts for this cause being submitted to us. Affirmed.
----

**EXHIBIT 8.1**

**LIST OF SUBSIDIARIESAS OF FEBRUARY 29, 2008**

| **Subsidiary**                             | **Incorporating Jurisdiction** |
|--------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|
| Intravelnet  Limited.                      | Ontario,  Canada               |
| Intravelnet  Inc.                          | Alberta,  Canada               |
| ATM  Travel Group Ltd.                     | British  Columbia, Canada      |
| International  Fitness Vacations (BC) Ltd. | British  Columbia, Canada      |
| Price  Shield Systems Inc.                 | Washington  State, USA         |
| American  Life Settlement Society, LLC     | Deleware,  USA                 |

----
December 1, 2015

Dear Mr. Nguyen:

This letter is to inform you th at the following information is missing from your petition (Docket

No. FAA

− 2015

− 4108). 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., fi xed-wing, rotorcraft, lighter-than-air) for the proposed UAS operati on. The description(s) should include the maximum weight (including pa yload). This information can be located in the aircraft manual(s).

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov. Once your information has b een submitted, please also send a copy of the requested information (and any proprietary in formation), as well as your comment tracking number from regulations.gov via e-mail to 333exe mptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the in formation described above by 12/15/15. If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

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

Sincerely,

/S/ Program Analyst
#### Brusberg, Appellant, vs. Industrial Commission and others, Respondents.

For the appellant: *Sydney M. Eisenberg,*attorney, and *Poss, Toelle & Schuler*of counsel, all of Milwaukee.

*661For the respondent Industrial Commission: *John E. Martin,*attorney general, and *Mortimer Levitan,*assistant attorney general.

For the respondents Everbrite Electric Sign Company and American Mutual Liability Insurance Company: *Charles H. Gorman*of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                               JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                 JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                       1,397,239
<SECURITIES>                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,559,502
<ALLOWANCES>                                 307,004
<INVENTORY>                                  395,717
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,007,699
<PP&E>                                       3,976,295
<DEPRECIATION>                               (1,558,757)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,257,792
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        25,064,597
<BONDS>                                      0
<COMMON>                                     144,770
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (15,951,575)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,257,792
<SALES>                                      17,241,003
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             17,241,003
<CGS>                                        16,360,977
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                16,360,977
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,784,184
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           203,988
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (4,108,146)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (4,108,146)
<DISCONTINUED>                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              (1,420,172)
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (5,528,318)
<EPS-BASIC>                                (.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                (.39)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                             245
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   245
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     245
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,082
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        70,092
<OTHER-SE>                                   (155,871)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       245
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   60,996
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,412
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (66,408)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (66,408)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.03)


</TABLE>
1 On February 28, 2003, Stewart and Stewart not ified the

Court that The Torrington Company was acquiredby The Timken Company, and is now known as Timken U.S. Corporation. Slip Op. 03-75
UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE
BEFORE: SENIOR JUDGE NICHOLAS TSOUCALAS

________________________________________ : SKF USA INC., SKF GmbH, SKF FRANCE : S.A., SARMA, SKF INDUSTRIE S.p.A. and : SKF SVERIGE AB, : : Plaintiffs, : : and : : INA WÄLZLAGER SCHAEFFLER oHG and : INA USA CORPORATION, : Court No. 00-09-00448 : Plaintiff-Intervenors, : : v. : : UNITED STATES, : : Defendant, : : and : : TIMKEN U.S. CORPORATION, : : Defendant-Intervenor. : ________________________________________:

JUDGMENT
This Court, having received and reviewed the United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration’s (“Commerce”) Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand (“ Remand Results ”), SKF USA Inc. v. United States , 2002 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 127, Slip Op. 02-129 (Oct. 25, 2002), comments of SKF USA Inc., SKF GmbH, SKF France S.A., Sarma, SKF Industrie S.p.A. and SKF Sverige AB, comments and reply comments of INA Wälzlager Schaeffler oHG and INA USA Corporation, rebuttal comments of Timken U.S. Corporation 1 and Commerce’s response, holds thatCourt No. 00-09-00448 Page 2

Commerce duly complied with the Court’s remand order, and it is hereby
ORDERED that the Remand Results filed by Commerce January 23, 2003, are affirmed in their entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that since all other issues have been decided, this case is dismissed.

__________________________________ NICHOLAS TSOUCALAS SENIOR JUDGE
Dated: June 30, 2003

New York, New York