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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF AMERICAN SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING,
INC. FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 28, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-28-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           3,202
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,019
<ALLOWANCES>                                       148
<INVENTORY>                                      4,736
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                14,095
<PP&E>                                           1,304
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,860
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,514
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,239
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,058
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,092
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,514
<SALES>                                         28,479
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                28,479
<CGS>                                           18,423
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   26,519
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (43)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 111
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,003
<INCOME-TAX>                                        78
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,925
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,925
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .40
        

</TABLE>
#### In re Theodore Roosevelt JOHNSON, Sr., Linda Faye Johnson, Debtors.

Bankruptcy No. 38100285.

United States Bankruptcy Court, W. D. Kentucky.

Sept. 16, 1981.

Joseph S. Elder, Louisville, Ky., for debtors.

J. Baxter Schilling, Louisville, Ky., trustee.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

MERRITT S. DEITZ, Jr., Bankruptcy Judge.

Is a bus a bus, or is it a car?

Reluctantly we conclude that it is a car.

Bankruptcy petitioner, Theodore Roosevelt Johnson, Sr., has claimed as exempt his 1969 Dodge bus. The bus has a seating capacity of 60 passengers. Upon it are occasionally transported members of Johnson’s church congregation.

The trustee vehemently objects. He points to the state exemption statute, KRS 427.010, which in pertinent part permits the exemption of “one motor vehicle and its necessary accessories, including one spare tire, not exceeding $2,500 in value...”

The trustee patiently explains that the legislature intended the term “motor vehicle” to be synonymous with “automobile”.

Enacted in 1980, the statute excluded earlier statutory limits upon the *uses*to which a motor vehicle might be put, so we must cast altogether aside the trustee’s concern with the voluminous seating capacity of the behemoth. The record is silent on the size of the petitioner’s family and their transportation needs.

Is a Moped a motor vehicle? What would the licensing arm of the state Department of Transportation say to the contention that a bus is not a motor vehicle? What would Gertrude Stein have to say about what a motor vehicle is?

Such rhetorical questions having been considered, we are bold to say that a bus is a motor vehicle.

In our dialectic, during this era of motorized evolution, we are inclined to regard the “bus” and the “automobile” as species of the genus, “motor vehicle”.

*15This Bankruptcy Court is answerable to an appellate forum of literal bent, That is good, for it gives us guidance and certainty in ascribing to the legislature the ability to express its intent in clear, simple, precise English.

As this trustee will recall, District Judge Thomas Ballantine, in reviewing a decision of this court, recently held that a statutory 15-day limitation upon the recording of chattel mortgages imposed a recording limitation *not*of indeterminate length, as was contended, but a limitation of *15 days.*

Guided by that clarity of perception, we find with conviction that a motor vehicle is a motor vehicle, and not necessarily an automobile. We expressly reserve, until it is properly presented, any consideration of the reverse proposition that an automobile is neither a bus nor a motor vehicle.

Abundantly confident that this opinion will find its way alongside *Marbury v. Madison*and *McCulloch v. Maryland*in the lasting library of legal logic, it is hereby

ORDERED that Theodore Roosevelt Johnson, Sr. is entitled to the claimed exemption, and the trustee shall comport his activities accordingly in administration of the estate.
**NOTE**

**DATE:** March 5, 2012 **TO:** Docket EPA - HQ - OAR - 2011 - 0660 **FROM:** Mary

Johnson **SUBJECT:** Summary

of Earl y Outreach to Small Entities Standards of Performance for GHG Emissions for New Stationary Sources: E GUs : Proposed Rule The EPA’s outreach to small e ntities regarded planned actions for new and existing sources, but only new sources would be affected b y th e currently proposed action. At that time, the EPA believed it likely that proposed regulations for greenhouse gas ( GHG ) emissions from electric uti lity generating units ( EGUs ) (new sources as well as existing sources) would not result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities (SI SNOSE) . However , because the EPA believes that outreach to small entities is an important element in the development of the se regulations , the EPA requested that a Small Business Advocacy Review ( SBAR) Panel be convened to allow th at outreach to occur. It has since been determined that new source performance standards (NSPS) for emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) for new affected fossil - fuel - fired EGUs will be proposed at this time. At a future date, the EPA intends to promulgate emission guidelines for states to develop plans reducing CO 2 emissions from existing fossil - fuel - fired EGUs. **Summa ry of April 6, 2011 Call with**  **S mall**  **E ntities**  When conducted, this conference call with small entity representatives was referred to as Pre - Panel Outreach (i.e., informal outreach prior to beginning the formal SBAR Panel process) . The purpose of the meetin g was to provide small entity representatives with an overview of recent EPA proposals impacting the power sector. Specificall y, overviews of the Transport Rule, the Toxics Rule, and the 316(b) Rule proposals were presented. A list of conference call par ticipants is attached to this note. Copies of the three presentations are included as attachments to the docket entry Conference Call with Small Entities_04 - 2011_email . **Summary of February and March**  **2011 Listening Sessions**  The E PA also engaged in outreach with entities that would potentially be affected b y GHG standards for EGUs. Small entities and organizations that represent and include small entities were included in the outreach. The outreach consisted of the Assistant Administrator of EPA’s Office o f Air and Radiation holding four listening sessions with various ty pes of stakeholders during February and March 2011 . Specificall y, listening sessions were held with (1) the electric power industry, (2) environmental and environmental justice groups, (3) State and Tribal representatives, and (4) coalition groups. Stakeholder input received during the listening sessions and as part of the public comment process associated with the proposed settlement agreement requiring that the EPA establish NSPS and emi ssion guidelines for fossil fuel - fired EGUs is located in Docket EPA - HQ - OAR - 2011 - 0090 . Attachment
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                             
<ARTICLE>                                          5
       
<CAPTION>
<LEGEND>
                                                                     EXHIBIT 27

                                 ILLUMINET HOLDINGS, INC.

                                 FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE


  THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
  CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS OF ILLUMINET  HOLDINGS,  INC. AS OF
  JUNE 30, 1997, AND FOR THE THREE MONTHS THEN ENDED, AND IS QUALIFIED IN
  ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                              0001002119
<NAME>                                             Illuminet Holdings, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                       1
<CURRENCY>                                         U.S. Dollars
<S>                                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                       JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                    1
<CASH>                                             11,756,314
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      25,764,973
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (594,000)
<INVENTORY>                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   37,333,133
<PP&E>                                             60,211,065
<DEPRECIATION>                                     29,603,237
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     72,590,266
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              27,644,792
<BONDS>                                            29,949,289
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        26
<COMMON>                                           52,669
<OTHER-SE>                                         24,943,490
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       72,590,266
<SALES>                                            0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   24,385,091
<CGS>                                              0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      20,501,488
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   (150,000)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 760,830
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    3,383,710
<INCOME-TAX>                                       67,674
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                3,316,036
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                       3,316,036
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      0.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0.56
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7467

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DWAYNE DELESTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (2:99-cr-00751-DCN-6; 2:02-cv-03895-DCN) Submitted: November 21, 2006 Decided: December 4, 2006 Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dwayne Deleston, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Dwayne Deleston seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s order was entered on the docket on May 2, 2005. The notice of appeal was filed, at the earliest, on July 25, 2006. Because Deleston failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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. DISMISSED
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Icemen Practice Recovery Operations during Arctic Gold 18-5

By Senior Airman Cassie Whitman354th Fighter Wing Public Affairs

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More News
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TOSECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Pursuant to Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, the Chief Financial Officerand Treasurer of American Science & Engineering, Inc. (the “Company”),does hereby certify that to the undersigned’s knowledge:

1.                the Company’sAnnual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2006 (“10-K”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.                theinformation contained in the Company’s 10-K being filed fairly presents,in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation ofthe Company
| Date: June 9, 2006 |                                     |
|-------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                    | /s/  KENNETH J. GALAZNIK                 |
|                    | Kenneth J.  Galaznik                     |
|                    | *Chief  Financial Officer and Treasurer* |

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to American Science &Engineering, Inc. and will be retained by American Science &Engineering, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

----
_______________________________________ __ ___________________ ________________ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

April 10, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly 134408(37) Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices LAURA K. FUNDUNBURKS, Plaintiff-Appellee, SC: 134408 v COA: 274928 Ingham CC: 06-000062-NI CAPITAL AREA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY and MICHELLE BEARD, Defendants-Appellants.

On order of the Chief Justice, th e motion by the Michigan County Road Commission Self-Insurance Pool for leave to file a brief amicus curiae is considered and it is GRANTED

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 10, 2008

Clerk
H. R. 1109 

One Hundred Fifteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and eighteen 

An Act 

To amend section 203 of the Federal Power Act. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF FACILITY MERGER AUTHORIZATION. 

Section 203(a)(1) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824b(a)(1)) 

is amended by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following: 

‘‘(B) merge or consolidate, directly or indirectly, its facilities 

subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission, or any part 

thereof, with the facilities of any other person, or any part 

thereof, that are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission 

and have a value in excess of $10,000,000, by any means 

whatsoever;’’. 

SEC. 2. NOTIFICATION FOR CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS. 

Section 203(a) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824b(a)) 

is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph: 

‘‘(7)(A) Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 

of this paragraph, the Commission shall promulgate a rule 

requiring any public utility that is seeking to merge or consolidate, directly or indirectly, its facilities subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission, or any part thereof, with those of 

any other person, to notify the Commission of such transaction 

not later than 30 days after the date on which the transaction 

is consummated if— 

‘‘(i) the facilities, or any part thereof, to be acquired 

are of a value in excess of $1,000,000; and 

‘‘(ii) such public utility is not required to secure an 

order of the Commission under paragraph (1)(B). 

‘‘(B) In establishing any notification requirement under 

subparagraph (A), the Commission shall, to the maximum 

extent practicable, minimize the paperwork burden resulting 

from the collection of information.’’. 

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

The amendment made by section 1 shall take effect 180 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act. 

SEC. 4. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION REPORT. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after the date of 

enactment of this Act, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

shall submit to Congress a report that assesses the effects of the 

amendment made by section 1. 
H. R. 1109—2 

(b) REQUIREMENTS.—In preparing the report under subsection 

(a), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission shall— 

(1) take into account any information collected under paragraph (7) of section 203(a) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 

824b(a)) (as added by section 2); and 

(2) provide for public notice and comment with respect 

to the report. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
Exhibit 32.1

                    Libra Alliance Corporation

                 CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT
    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                      18 U.S.C. Section 1350

The undersigned officer of Libra Alliance Corporation certifies pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

..      the annual report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year ended
       December 31, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section
       13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

..      the information contained in the Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all
       material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
       the Company.


Date:   March 25, 2005
                                      /s/ April L. Marino
                                      ____________________________________
                                      April L. Marino
                                      Principal Executive Officer
                                      Principal Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 14, 2009)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E91]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

 RECOGNIZING ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO DEFEND ITSELF AGAINST ATTACKS FROM GAZA

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                             HON. JOE BACA

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, January 9, 2009

  Mr. BACA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to 
support Israel, our strongest ally in the Middle East, during her time 
of need. Israel's unstable situation continue to get worst. Since 2005, 
Israel has attempted to promote peace with the Palestinians by 
withdrawing its civilians and soldiers from Gaza in hopes of lessening 
day to day conflicts.
  Now for more than two weeks, the Hamas leadership in Gaza continues 
to hold Palestinian civilians as hostages to its terrorist agenda and 
Israelis now find themselves within range of Hamas rockets. The 
bloodshed and conflict of this situation will only lead to more 
devastation. Every day more innocent civilians on both sides of the 
Gazan border are suffering.
  The United States supports Israel and all efforts to promote a cease-
fire and a durable and sustainable resolution of the Israeli-
Palestinian conflict. I urge my colleagues to remember that our 
strongest ally in the Middle East is Israel and we must support her 
efforts towards peace during this time.

                          ____________________
```