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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001004539
<NAME>                        AIRPLANES LTD
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000,000
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                                 187
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                           25
<ALLOWANCES>                                           (15)
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       203
<PP&E>                                               4,136
<DEPRECIATION>                                       1,506
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       2,834
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  125
<BONDS>                                              3,285
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                          (1,706)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         2,834
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       218
<CGS>                                                   (1)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         (123)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       (16)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        (5)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    (235)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       (162)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             2
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   (160)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                          (160)
<EPS-BASIC>                                              0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0



</TABLE>
# C_2005093EN.01001903.xml

| 16.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/19

---

Action brought on 18 February 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Republic of Finland

(Case C-88/05)

(2005/C 93/36)

Language of the case: Finnish

An action against the Republic of Finland was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 18 February 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by M. Huttunen and K. Simonsson, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

| 1. | declare that, by failing to bring into force all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 (1) establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system and repealing Council Directive 93/75/EEC, or at least by failing to communicate them to the Commission, the Republic of Finland has failed to comply with its obligations under the directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

declare that, by failing to bring into force all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2002/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 (1) establishing a Community vessel traffic monitoring and information system and repealing Council Directive 93/75/EEC, or at least by failing to communicate them to the Commission, the Republic of Finland has failed to comply with its obligations under the directive;

1

| 2. | order the Republic of Finland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for implementation of the directive expired on 5 February 2004.

---

(1)  OJ L 208 of 5.8.2002, p. 10.

1

---
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-91,146-01

EX PARTE CARLOS GARCIA, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. CR-16-0668-D-WHC 1 IN THE 22ND DISTRICT COURT

FROM HAYS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Applicant was convicted of one count of aggravated sexual assault of a child, three counts

of indecency with a child by contact, and two counts of indecency with a child by exposure. He was

sentenced to thirty-five years for count one, fifteen years for count two, ten years for counts three and

four, five years for count five, and ten years, probated for count six. The trial court ordered counts

one, two, five and six to run concurrently and counts three and four to run consecutively. The

Thirteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Garcia v. State, No. 13-17-00218-CR (Tex.

App. — Coprus Christi - EdinburgMarch 28, 2019) (not designated for publication). Applicant filed

this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk

forwarded it to this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.
2

On April 29, 2020, this Court remanded this matter to the trial court to obtain affidavits and

findings of fact addressing Applicant’s claim that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. 

On July 23, 2020, this Court received the supplemental record after remand, which consisted only

of the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. In those findings of fact and conclusions

of law, the trial court makes reference to an affidavit submitted byApplicant’s trial attorney, Christie

Williams, but no such affidavit was included in the supplemental record. 

On July 28, 2020, this Court issued an order instructing the Hays County District Clerk to

either supplement the record with a copy of trial counsel’s affidavit, or certify in writing that that

the affidavit of trial counsel is not part of the record. On August 14, 2020, this Court received a

response from the Hays County District Clerk, which included a written certification that no such

affidavit is on file with that office. Without an affidavit from trial counsel, the trial court’s findings

of fact and conclusions of law are not supported by the record.

The trial court shall insure that the habeas record is supplemented with a copy of the affidavit

of trial counsel to which the trial court’s findings refer within thirty days from the date of this order. 

The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this Court the record developed on remand,

including, among other things, affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions,

orders, and transcripts from hearings and depositions. See TEX. R. APP. P. 73.4(b)(4). Any

extensions of time must be requested by the trial court and obtained from this Court.

Filed: September 16, 2020

Do not publish
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 32.1

                               HINES HORTICULTURE

                            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 Hines Horticulture, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Robert A. Ferguson, President and Chief Operating 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 result of
                  operations of the Company.


                                              By: /s/ Robert A. Ferguson
                                                  ----------------------
                                                  Robert A. Ferguson
                                                  CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
                                                  (PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER)


August 6, 2003

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Hines Horticulture, Inc. and will be retained by Hines
Horticulture, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
RETROSPETTIVA'S 10-QSB FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 WHICH ARE
UNAUDITED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       4,335,895
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  879,583
<ALLOWANCES>                                    17,196
<INVENTORY>                                  3,723,969
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,343,228
<PP&E>                                          58,675
<DEPRECIATION>                                  13,442
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,406,513
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,338,734
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     5,573,013
<OTHER-SE>                                     230,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,406,513
<SALES>                                     13,026,900
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            13,026,900
<CGS>                                       11,124,972
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,722,659
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              50,501
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,304,241
<INCOME-TAX>                                   506,871
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   755,023
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .38
        

</TABLE>
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JU NE 2 5 , 2015

NO. 03

- 14

- 0030 9

- CR

Wesley Eugene Perkins, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR , PEMBERTON, AND FIE LD

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment of guilty r en d ered by the trial court. Having reviewed the

record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the trial

court’s judgment of guilty . Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of guilty

.

A ppellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Cou rt and in the court below

.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We have issued our report datedMarch 9, 2009, with respect to the financial statements and schedule in the Annual Report of SRI/Surgical Express, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reportin the Registration Statements of SRI/Surgical Express, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-31911, effective July 23, 1997; File No. 333-67618, effective August 15, 2001; File No. 333-67626, effective August 15, 2001; FileNo. 333-123616, effective March 28, 2005). 

/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP 

Tampa, Florida 

March 9, 2009
-86 -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74

 36

 38

 40

 42

▲ ★

▲

▲ ▲

★

▲

▲

▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 1000

18 12 06 00

10/09

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 09 Oct 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.86 N 77.06 W Meters AGL
•

. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

WHMOMMON

OTC[ Or TIMC UNDER inCRILTARY

February 3, 1964

182408A/IDOIS FOR SSCIEURT &*mm

Subsequent to our discussion of the management practices

followed in the conduct of the =OWL project, I provided a

briefing to the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory

Board (FIAR) on January 30, 1964. This was in response to

their request to be brought up-to-date an the status of a

proposal to have a group of consultants examine the conduct by

the Government and its contractors of this project.

After hearing a discussion of the present management

arrangements, the Fla specifically asked for my recommendations

as to possible changes. After first explaining that my recomr

mad/miens did not have approval from you or from the Director

of Central Intelligence, I presented essentially the structure,

policies, and actions outlined in my report to you of January 28,

19o4. I propose at the earliest possible time to give the Del

a similar detailed briefing of my survey and recommendations..

As a first step toward enforcing better control of this

project, I have issued the attached directive that sets out

policy and objectives, and introduces procedures for keeping

me more closely imformied of proposed engineering changes.

Further, 1 have scheduled a complete CORONA Technical Review

for the 17th and 1Sth of February in which I intend to cover

at a minimum all of the contractors' ensineering efforts, now

underway and proposed, having to do with the major components

cf this system.

Distribution:

Cy 1 to Sec De f

2 to

3 to RF 1

Brockway

Director

dational Reconnaissance Office

Attachment

(Note: Atchcf.§11102471-64,

dated 3Feb 64)

CORONA

TOP SFrs;:.TT

:Ori-12-__OF_J4COPiEr

DAGE--Z-0,11--t-PAZES

1111111111kaaate •••n••••n••••••••.,

•
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6798

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

SAMUEL LLOYD, a/k/a Sammy,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, Chief District Judge. (2:11-cr-00036-MSD-FBS-1)

Submitted: July 8, 2024 Decided: July 19, 2024

Before GREGORY and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Samuel Lloyd, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6798 Doc: 7 Filed: 07/19/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Samuel Lloyd appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to be released 

from home confinement. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See United States v. Lloyd, No. 2:11-cr00036-MSD-FBS-1 (E.D. Va. Aug. 3, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6798 Doc: 7 Filed: 07/19/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
Exhibit 33.1


CERTIFICATION REPORT





Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting





Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting of the Company. Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.





The Company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.





Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.





Management conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting based on the framework in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on this evaluation, management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2010.





Date: April 8, 2011                                                           By: /s/ Joseph M. Cummins


Joseph M. Cummins


President, Chief Executive Officer





Date: April 8, 2011                                                           By: /s/ Bernard Cohen


Bernard Cohen


Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
# C_2004300EN.01005403.xml

| 4.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 300/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 300/54

---

Removal from the Register of Case T-305/99 (1)

1

(2004/C 300/106)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

By order of 5 October 2004, the President of the Second Chamber, Extended Composition, of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the Register of Case T-305/99, OK Nederland B.V., supported by Kingdom of the Netherlands v Commission of the European Communities.

---

(1)  OJ C 63 of 4.3.2000.

1

---
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 909/2006

of 20 June 2006         

amending Annexes I and II to Regulation (EC) No 138/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the economic accounts for agriculture in the Community

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 138/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 December 2003 on the economic accounts for agriculture in the Community (1), and in particular Article 2(2) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 138/2004 is amended as shown in Annex I to this Regulation.

Article 2

Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 138/2004 is amended as shown in Annex II to this Regulation.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following 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, 20 June 2006.

For the Commission

Joaquín ALMUNIA            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 33, 5.2.2004, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 306/2005 (OJ L 52, 25.2.2005, p. 9).

(2)OJ L 179, 7.8.1972, p. 1.

----

ANNEX I

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 138/2004 is amended as follows:

----

ANNEX II

In Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 138/2004, item 19.10 ‘Other goods and services’ is replaced by the following two items:

----
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1



             LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF U.S. PLASTIC LUMBER CORPORATION

SUBSIDIARY - DOING BUSINESS AS              STATE OF INCORPORATION



U.S. PLASTIC LUMBER LTD.                               Delaware
         Eaglebrook Plastics, Inc.                     Illinois
         Eaglebrook Products, Inc.                     Illinois

CLEAN EARTH, INC.                                      Delaware
         Clean Earth of New Castle, Inc.               Delaware
         Consolidated Technologies, Inc.               Pennsylvania
         Integrated Technical Services, Inc.           New Jersey
         S & W Waste, Inc.                             New Jersey
         Soil Remediation of Philadelphia, Inc.        Delaware
         Allied Waste Services, Inc.                   Delaware 

U.S. PLASTIC LUMBER FINANCE CORP.                      Delaware
         U.S. Plastic Lumber IP Corp.                  Delaware
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statements on Form S-3 related to the Shelf Registration dated December 11, 1997
(File No. 333-42049) and Form S-3 related to the Shelf Registration dated May
26, 2000 (File No. 333-37922) of Colonial Realty Limited Partnership of our
report dated January 17, 2003, except for Note 16, as to which the date is
February 28, 2003 relating to financial statements and financial statement
schedules, which appears in this Form 10-K.



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Birmingham, Alabama
March 28, 2003