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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000926283
<NAME> JAMES CABLE FINANCE CORP.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       8,204,862
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,303,317
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,376
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,743,460
<PP&E>                                      82,814,721
<DEPRECIATION>                              71,279,455
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              42,413,047
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,052,861
<BONDS>                                    100,020,322
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                (64,660,136)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                42,413,047
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            26,728,392
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               20,561,059
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               147,992
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           6,808,247
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (788,906)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (788,906)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            (3,125,012)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,913,918)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 160 (Thursday, October 2, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Page S10399]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

              APPOINTMENT OF ACTING PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to 
the Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd).
  The assistant legislative clerk read the following letter:

                                                      U.S. Senate,

                                        President pro tempore,

                                  Washington, DC, October 2, 2008.
     To the Senate:
       Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the 
     Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable 
     Mark L. Pryor, a Senator from the State of Arkansas, to 
     perform the duties of the Chair.
                                                   Robert C. Byrd,
                                            President pro tempore.

  Mr. PRYOR thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro 
tempore.

                          ____________________
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 172 (Thursday, November 6, 2008)]
[Daily Digest]
[Page D1261]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                        House of Representatives

Chamber Action
  The House was not in session today. The House is scheduled to meet at 
11 a.m. on Saturday, January 3, 2009, pursuant to the provisions of H. 
Con. Res. 440.
```
保護工人 

遠離暑熱疾病

暑熱疾病

暴露在高溫下會導致疾病和死亡,最嚴重的暑熱

疾病是中暑,同時還應避免其他暑熱疾病,如熱

衰竭、熱痙攣和熱疹。

任何時候在高溫下進行體力勞動的時候,都應該

採取預防措施。

暑熱疾病的風險因素

•	高溫高濕、太陽直射、無風

•	重體力勞動

•	最近沒有在高溫場所工作過

•	水分攝入不足

•	不透氣的衣服

熱衰竭的症狀

•	頭痛、頭暈或昏厥

•	虛弱,皮膚潮濕

•	易怒或眩暈

•	口渴、噁心或嘔吐

中暑的症狀

•	可能感到眩暈、無法思考,暈倒、虛脫或癲癇發作

•	可能無法排汗

要避免暑熱疾病,應該:

•	設立完整的暑熱疾病預防方案。

•	提供有關暑熱危害以及

如何預防這些危害的培訓。

•	在工作區域附近,為工人提供足量冷

飲。至少每小時供應1品脫(約0.5升)

的水。

速覽卡
•	修改排班表,並在陰涼處或空調間

安排多次休息時間。

•	逐漸增加工作量,並允許剛接觸高溫

環境的工人或已經離開工作環境以便

適應高溫工作的工人更頻繁地休息(適應

環境)。

•	指定一名負責人監控工作條件,並保護有熱應

激風險的工人。

•	考慮提供可以降溫的防護服。

如何保護工人

•	瞭解中暑的體征、症狀;自我監測;

多人結組工作。

•	遮擋直射的陽光和其他熱源。

•	足量、多次喝水,在感到口渴之前喝

水,每 15 分鐘喝一次水。

•	避免飲用含酒精或咖啡因的飲料。

•	穿輕便、淺色、寬鬆的衣服。

工人因暑熱生病怎麼辦

•	呼叫主管尋求幫助,如果主管不在,請撥打911。

•	讓某人陪在該人身邊直到救援到來。

•	將該人轉移到涼爽或陰涼的地方。

•	脫掉該人的外衣。

•	扇風並向其身體用水噴霧;冰敷(冰袋

或涼毛巾)。

•	如果其仍可以吞咽,為其提供涼爽的飲用水。

如果工人沒有警覺或看起來很困惑,其可能已

經中暑。立即撥打911並儘快冰敷。

OSHA 4360-08 2023 | Chinese Traditional

速覽卡

www.osha.gov (800) 321-OSHA (6742)

更多資訊:

職業安

全和 健

康管理
CLD-040 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 23-2878

___________

IN RE: PALANI KARUPAIYAN,

 Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

United States District Court for the District of New Jersey

(Related to D.N.J. Civ. No. 2-23-cv-00844)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

December 7, 2023

Before: KRAUSE, FREEMAN, and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed December 19, 2023)

_________

OPINION*

_________

PER CURIAM

Palani Karupaiyan filed the suit at issue here against numerous defendants and 

raised numerous claims. Among other things, he named as defendants New Jersey judges 

and raised claims regarding a New Jersey family court proceeding in which his former 

wife received a divorce and custody of the couple’s two minor children. The District 

Court dismissed Karupaiyan’s complaint, and Karupaiyan has appealed at C.A. No. 23-

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not 

constitute binding precedent.
2

1788, which is pending. Karupaiyan later filed the mandamus petition at issue here.1 

Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that we have the discretion to grant only 

when, inter alia, the petitioner has no other means of obtaining relief. See Gillette v. 

Prosper, 858 F.3d 833, 841 (3d Cir. 2017). In this case, Karupaiyan requests numerous 

orders, including an order vacating the District Court’s judgment and various orders 

directed to the New Jersey judiciary and the Supreme Court of India. To the extent that 

Karupaiyan seeks to challenge the dismissal of his complaint, we deny his request 

because, as we previously advised him in at least three other cases, “he may challenge the 

District Court’s dismissal order through the normal appeal process.” In re Karupaiyan, 

No. 23-1288, 2023 WL 3002743, at *1 (3d Cir. Apr. 19, 2023), cert. denied, __ S. Ct. __, 

No. 23-78, 2023 WL 6558432 (U.S. Oct. 10, 2023); In re Karupaiyan, No. 23-1304, 2023 

WL 2854134, at *1 (3d Cir. Apr. 10, 2023); In re Karupaiyan, No. 23-1303, 2023 WL 

2823892, at *1 (3d Cir. Apr. 7, 2023), cert. denied, __ S. Ct. __, 2023 WL 6558430 (U.S. 

Oct. 10, 2023). To the extent that Karupaiyan seeks any other relief, we deny his 

requests because he has not shown that the extraordinary remedy of mandamus is 

warranted as to any form of relief that we have jurisdiction to grant.

For these reasons, we deny Karupaiyan’s mandamus petition.

1 Karupaiyan initially filed his petition on the docket of his appeal at C.A. No. 23-1788, 

but our Clerk notified him that a mandamus petition is an original proceeding that 

requires a separate filing fee and that his petition would be separately docketed. 

Karupaiyan did not object to that order and instead sought and obtained leave to proceed 

in forma pauperis in this separately docketed mandamus proceeding.
Order entered October 21 , 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 14
- 00259
- CR
TRAVIS WAYNE CARROLL , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F13
- 41119
- H



### O RDER
The Court GRANTS appellant’s October 19, 2014 motion to extend time to file his brief
as follows. We ORDER appellant to file, by NOVEMBER 20, 2014 , either appellant’s a motion to dismiss the appeal that complies with T exas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a). If neither a brief nor a motion to dismiss is filed by that date, the Court will order the trial court to make findings regarding the status of the appeal.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by elec tronic transmission, to counsel for all parties.
/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
#### Scott *v*. Drew and others.

Case agreed from Chowan.

Under the act of 1801, ch. 10, sec. 4, ten per cent, is to be calculated upon *the principal of the debt*only, from the rendering of the judgment in the County Court, to the rendering of the judgment in the Superior Court; and six per cent, thereafter until the debt be paid.

At November Term, 1804, of Bertie County Court, Scott obtained judgment against Drew in an action of debt, upon a bond conditioned in the penalty of £5685 17s. *2d.*for the payment of £2842 18s. *6d.*with interest from the first of August 1800. Drew appealed, and at March Term, 1807, of Chowan Superior Court, the Plaintiff1 obtained *judgment;*and on motion, judgment was rendered against his securities for the appeal. As the Defendant did not, in the Superior Court, diminish the amount of the judgment recovered against him in the County Court, a question arose, how the ten per cent, interest given by the act of 1801, ch. 10, was to be calculated ? And it was submitted to the Supreme Court to decide, Whether the ten per cent, given by this act shall be calculated upon the principal only of the said debt, or upon the aggregate amount of principal and interest due at the time of the judgment in the County Court ?

Haix, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the Court:

The act of 1801, ch. 10, sec. 4, states, “ that where a Defendant, in any action of debt, &c. shall appeal, &c. and shall not, on the trial of such appeal, diminish the sum recovered by the Plaintiff1, &c. the party so appealing shall pay to the Plaintiff the sum of ten per cent, to be computed from the time of rendering judgment in the County Court, to the time of rendering up judgment in the Superior Court, and the lawful rate per cent, from *26that time till the whole debt shall be paid,” &c. The true construction of this act is, that ten per cent, shall ^ pa{¿j Upon †|16 principal of the debt, and not upon the principal and interest added together. The Legislature intended to substitute ten per cent, in the place of six per cent, the legal interest, from the time of rendering judgment in the County Court, to the rendition of the judgment in the Superior Court, and to charge the Defendant with the lawful rate per cent, from that time till he paid the debt.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 858 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 858

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
 at 18 Greenville Street in Newnan, Georgia, as the ``Lewis R. Morgan 
            Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 22, 1999

 Mr. Coverdell introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
 at 18 Greenville Street in Newnan, Georgia, as the ``Lewis R. Morgan 
            Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF LEWIS R. MORGAN FEDERAL BUILDING AND UNITED 
              STATES COURTHOUSE.

    The Federal building and United States courthouse located at 18 
Greenville Street in Newnan, Georgia, shall be known and designated as 
the ``Lewis R. Morgan Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building and United States 
courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 
to the ``Lewis R. Morgan Federal Building and United States 
Courthouse''.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION**     I, Edward B. Cloues, II, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of K-Tron International, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:          (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;          (b) [paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986]          (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and          (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):          (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: March 23, 2006 EDWARD B. CLOUES, II   Edward B. Cloues, II   Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         October 31, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on October 21, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 498 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents                           ( print page 86854)                        are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-115, K2025-113.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-25251 Filed 10-30-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2010-NM-143-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1370
In Re: STUART HILL; In Re: VICKI HILL, Debtors.
STUART HILL; VICKI HILL, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus STATE OF MARYLAND, (O.A.G.) Consumer Protection Division, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA01-692-CCB, AP-99-5579-JS) Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 4, 2002 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2 Stuart Hill, Vicki Hill, Appellants Pro Se. Philip David Ziperman, Assistant Attorney General, Steven M. Sakamoto-Wengel, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Stuart Hill and Vicki Hill appeal from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s orders finding that the claim of the Maryland Consumer Protection Division is nondischargeable and dismissing the Hills’ counterclaims. Our review of the record and the opinions below discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. In re: Hill , No. CA-01-692-CCB (D. Md. Feb. 12, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 785 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 785

                For the relief of Frances Schochenmaier.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 13, 1999

  Mr. Johnson (for himself and Mr. Daschle) introduced the following 
   bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed 
                                Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                For the relief of Frances Schochenmaier.

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

SECTION 1. RELIEF OF FRANCES SCHOCHENMAIER.

    (a) Relief.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay, out of any 
moneys in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Frances 
Schochenmaier of Bonesteel, South Dakota, the sum of $60,567.58 in 
compensation for the erroneous underpayment to Herman Schochenmaier, 
husband of Frances Schochenmaier, during the period from September 1945 
to March 1995, of compensation and other benefits relating to a 
service-connected disability incurred by Herman Schochenmaier during 
military service in World War II.
    (b) Limitation on Fees.--(1) Not more than a total of 10 percent of 
the payment required by subsection (a) may be paid to or received by 
agents or attorneys for services rendered in connection with obtaining 
such payment, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding.
    (2) Any person who violates this subsection shall be fined not more 
than $1,000.
                                 <all>
```
#### S. D. Kennedy v. The Chicago & Northwestern Railway Company, Appellant.

Circumstantial evidence clearly showing that an animal was struck ' BY A PASSING TRAIN: VERDICT FOR PLAINTIPE NOT DISTURBED.-

*Appeal from Clinton District Cowt.*— Hon. P. B. Wolke, Judge.

Friday, February 2, 1894.

Action to recover double the value of a bull alleged to have been killed on defendant’s right of way because of the same not being fenced. Answer, general denial. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant *appeals.*

Affirmed.

*Htitibwd Dawley*for appellant.

*Pascal §• Armentrout*for appellee.

Given, J.

The only contention is whether the evidence supports the verdict. There is no question but that the bull got upon the right of way through an opening in the right of way fence, and fell or was thrown from a bridge, and injured so that it had to be killed. No one is called who witnessed the accident, and therefore the cause has to be determined from the circumstances. Appellant cites the rule as announced in *Asbach v. Railway Co,.*74 Iowa, 248, 37 N. W. Rep. 182, as follows: “A theory can not be said to be established by circumstantial evidence, even in a civil action, unless the facts relied upon are of such a nature, and are so related to each other, that it is the only conclusion that can fairly or reasonably be drawn from them. It is not sufficient that they be consistent merely with that theory, for that may be true, and yet they may have no tendency to prove the theory.” We have examined the evidence with care and conclude that it fully warrants the finding of the jury. The evidence as to the tracks of the animal with reference to the bridge, the jnarks on the ties, and injuries upon and the position of the bull, and the *755number of trains that passed, that night, precludes every other conclusion as reasonable, except that the bull was struck by a passing train at the point to which his tracks were nearest the bridge, and carried onto and dropped over the bridge at the point where he was found. Affirmed.