alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1272 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1272

  To direct the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a 
 study on the effects of forward capacity auctions and other capacity 
                              mechanisms.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 11, 2015

Mr. Markey (for himself and Ms. Warren) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To direct the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a 
 study on the effects of forward capacity auctions and other capacity 
                              mechanisms.

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

SECTION 1. GAO CAPACITY MARKET IMPACT STUDY AND REPORT.

    Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 
the Comptroller General of the United States shall--
            (1) conduct a study of the effects of forward capacity 
        auctions or other capacity mechanisms that have been 
        established by Independent System Operators or Regional 
        Transmission Organizations on--
                    (A) consumer prices for electricity;
                    (B) the installation of new electrical generation 
                systems;
                    (C) the preservation of existing electrical 
                generation systems; and
                    (D) competition in energy markets, including the 
                potential for the use of undue market power or 
                manipulation in the auctions; and
            (2) submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a 
        report describing the results of the study conducted under 
        paragraph (1), including an assessment of whether the auctions 
        or capacity mechanisms are producing rates that are just and 
        reasonable.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 28, 2012 

y0321 

Order 

 

March 28, 2012 

143824 

STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 143824 

 COA: 301951 

Isabella CC: 2010-008488-CZ 

BRANDON McQUEEN and MATTHEW 

TAYLOR, d/b/a COMPASSIONATE 

APOTHECARY, LLC, 

Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 23, 2011 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall 

include among the issues to be briefed whether the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act 

(MMMA), MCL 333.26421 et seq., permits patient-to-patient sales of marihuana. 

 The Attorney General and the Michigan Association of Compassion Centers are 

invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or groups interested in the 

determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to 

file briefs amicus curiae.
New Mexico State Amendments to Part 75 (20.2.75 

NMAC), Construction Permit Fees, submitted to EPA 

April 11, 2002. 

The April 11, 2002, cover letter for this submittal is in 

this Regulations.gov docket (docket EPA-R06-OAR2005-NM-0006), document EPA-R06-OAR-2005-NM0006-0002. The documents submitted for the 

amendments to Part 75 are in Element 5 of the submittal, 

documents EPA-R06-OAR-2005-NM-0006-0014 to 

EPA-R06-OAR-2005-NM-0006-0018 in this docket.
SECRETARY OF Ti3 ATR FORCE
ORDER

SUBJECT: The Director of the SiMOS Project

l.. Effective this Gate, Brizudier Generul Robert B. Greer,
Assistant Caief of Star? for Guidec Hisziles, is
sevlgnutea us Director of the SAMOS Project, with
wdhdtional duty us Viec Commincer for Satellite Systems,
AFBMD, ‘RDC, with duty station et 2400 East El Segundo
Boulevird, 1 Segundo, Celifornia.

2. The Director will orgenize an office to manage tle SAMOS
Project. Minpower to ctere tke office will be draw
from menpower available to him as Vice Comanier for
Satellite Systems. The SAMs Project Office will be a
field extension of the Office of the Secretary of the
Air Force.

3.. The Director is responsible to and will report directly
to the Secretery of the Air- Force.

4, Additional duties may be assigned to the Director as
deemed appropriate by the Secretary of the Air Force.

/s/

- DUDLEY.C. SHARP
Secretary of the Air Force

COPY
#### ALLEN GRIST et. al. *vs.*ALLEN BACKHOUSE.

Dec. 1839

A negotiable instrument payable to R. G. “ agent of his assignees or order,” cannot be sued upon at law, in the name of the persons who were assignees of R. G. by a deed executed before the date of the negotiable *^*security, without his endorsement.

If the plaintiff were bound to support the affirmative of an issue made by the pleadings, and the Judge instructed the jury that the evidence offered by him was sufficient for that purpose, when, in law, it was not, and all this appears upon the record, this Court will notice the error, although no specific exception was taken to it by the defendant on the trial.

This was an action of debt, on a negotiable single bill, in which the plaintiffs declared as assignees of Richard Crist. *Plea*— the *general issue.*

On the trial at Craven, on the last circuit, before his honor Judge Settle, the plaintiffs proved and read in evidence the bill upon which they declared, in the following words and figures, to wit:

*“*$233. Ninety days after date we jointly and severally promise to pay Richard Grist, agent of his assignees, or order two hundred and thirty-three dollars, value received: Negotiable and payable at the Bank of New-Berne. Witness our hands and seals, July 23rd, 1833.

ALLEN BACKHOUSE, seal.

WM. Y. BARROW, seal.”

The plaintiffs then produced and read a deed of assignment to themselves of all the effects of Richard Grist, for the benefit of his creditors, which was executed before the date of the bill. There was no endorsement of the bill by the payee. Upon this evidence the jury, under the instruction of His Honor, returned a verdict for the plaintiffs; whereupon they had judgment, and the defendant appealed.

*J. H. Bryan*for the plaintiff.

*Badger*for the defendant.

Daniel, Judge,

after stating the case as above, proceeded as follows: W e are of the opinion that the evidence offered by the plaintiffs did not support their declaration; and that the Judge misdirected the jury as to the law, when he told them *363that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover. Where a bill was made payable to A. or order, to the use of B., it was held that B. had but an equitable right, not a legal interest; and that he could not maintain an action on the bill against the acceptor. *Evans*v. *Cramlington,*Carth. 5—1 Leigh’s N. P. 402—Byles on Bills, 84. So in this case, Richard Grist describing himself in the bill as the agent of his assignees, did not give them the legal title to the bill.

The counsel for the plaintiffs insist that the defendant cannot now object to this error, because there was rio specific exception taken at the trial. The' defendant had placed on the record his plea; it was for the plaintiffs to support the affirmative of the issue arising on that plea. The Court misdirected the jury as to the law on the trial of the issue, and told them that the evidence offered was sufficient for the plaintiffs. This error appears on the record, and for that the judgment must be reversed and a new trial awarded.

Pna Curiam. Judgment reversed.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE 

WASHINGTON, D.C. '20301 

liffliEtifikt- CT 2 9 1965 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 J 2015 

DOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; 

DEGLASSIMED AF1La 12 YEARS. 

DOD DIR 5200.10 

rthur Sylvester-- 

cc: 

Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs 

Assistant Administrator for Public Affairs (NASA) 

Director, U. S. Information Agency 

AS rat -3 V - 

MEMORANDUM FOR The Secretary of the Navy 

The Secretary of the Air Force-4---W 

The Director of Defense Research & Engineering 

The Assistant Secretary of Defense 

(International Security Affairs) 

SUBJECT: Public Affairs Guidance for the Manned Orbiting Laboratory 

(MOL) Program 

It is requested that the following guidance with respect to the 

Manned Orbiting Laboratory program be brought to the anon. 

Lion of all activities and key personnel involved in that program. 

At this time it is Department of Defense policy that public state' 

ments with regard to MOL will not be volunteered. Certain 

releases will be proniulgated, as approved by the Assistant 

Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs), as program milestones 

occur. National level press queries will be referred to ASD(PA) 

for response. Local responses to queries will be confined to the 

aggregate of material provided through official channels subsequent to the Presidential announcement August Z5, 1965. As of 

this date such material consists chiefly of the. Department of 

Defense release regarding the Presidential announcement and 

the Pentagon backgrounder by Dr. Albert C. Hall, then Deputy 

Director (Space), ODDR&E, both of August Z5, 1965. Speeches- - 

and interviews on IvIOL will not be volunteered, and all, requests 

for speeches or interviews must be cleared with ASD(PA) prior 

to acceptance. 

An amplified information plan for MOL is in coordination. 

PUBLIC AFFAIRS 

4
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   Sep-30-1999
<CASH>                                         53,877
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  147,007
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    27,127
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               251,816
<PP&E>                                         4,138,420
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,973,788
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,906,321
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          288,206
<BONDS>                                        1,538,697
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    1
<COMMON>                                       16,687
<OTHER-SE>                                     921,781
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2,906,321
<SALES>                                        516,293
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               516,293
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  427,510
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               43,445
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             86,601
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (59,301)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (9,269)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (50,032)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (78)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (50,110)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.36)



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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE HANOVER
DIRECT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND
STATEMENTS OF INCOME FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 26, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-25-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-26-1999
<CASH>                                           7,127
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,140
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (1,713)
<INVENTORY>                                     53,310
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               122,361
<PP&E>                                          89,057
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (42,034)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 199,741
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           77,066
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            6,223
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       140,772
<OTHER-SE>                                     (88,896)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   199,741
<SALES>                                        258,951
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               258,951
<CGS>                                          164,204
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  100,891
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                (6,144)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              (3,480)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (9,624)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (394)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (10,018)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (10,018)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.05)


</TABLE>
#### STATE v. J. A. BRYSON and others.

*Inclietment*— Coiielusion *of.*

llt'is no-ground for an arrest of judgment that an indictment charging only-a common law offence, concludes “ *contra formam, statuti,”*and “ against the peace and dignity of the State. The conclusion against .the statute may he rejected as surplusage.

*(State*v. *Lamb,*65 N. C. 419, cited and approved.)

’IndiotmbNT for disturbing a Religious Congregation tried .-.at Spring Term, 1878, of Henderson Superior Court, before *¡Cloud,.,!.*

*652There was a verdict of guilty, motion in arrest of judgment, motion overruled, and appeal by defendants.

*Attorney*General, for the State.

*Mr. J. II. Merrimon,*for the defendants.

EaiRCLOTh, J".

The defendants were indicted for disturbing a religious congregation which is a common law offence,, and the" indictment concluded *contra formam*statuti, and against the peace and dignity of the State. After conviction they moved in arrest of judgment on the ground that-the indictment concluded against the statute. It has often been held that this part of the conclusion is merely sur-plusage. *State*v. *Lamb,*65 N. C. 419; *Com.*v. Hoxey, 16 Mass. 385; 2 Leach Cr. Law, 584; 2 Hale 190. The objection is not sustained. Let this be certified and the Supeiioi-Court will proceed according to law.-

No error. Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
 This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Form 10-Q
 for the quarter ended June 30, 2000 and is qualified in its entirity by
 reference to such statements.)
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   3-Mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Mar-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                                   Jun-30-2000
<CASH>                                         16,067
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  175,273
<ALLOWANCES>                                   20,344
<INVENTORY>                                    218,584
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               414,229
<PP&E>                                         2,635,167
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,502,909
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 546,487
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,323,228
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    2,400,000
<COMMON>                                       61,674
<OTHER-SE>                                    (3,242,195)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   546,487
<SALES>                                        365,361
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               365,361
<CGS>                                          123,237
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  300,322
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,665
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (63,863)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (63,863)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (63,863)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)



</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1





                                                                  Exhibit No. 15

November 10, 1995


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

Dear Sirs:

We are aware that MICROS Systems, Inc. has incorporated by reference our report
dated November 10, 1995 (issued pursuant to the provisions of Statement on
Auditing Standards No. 71) in the Prospectus constituting part of its
Registration Statements on Forms S-8, (No. 33-69782, No. 33-44481 and No.
33-33535).  We are also aware of our responsibilities under the Securities Act
of 1933.

Yours very truly,

PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP





                                       15
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10 - 16 - 00062 - CR
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellant v. JOSE ESTRADA , Appellee

From the County Court at Law Walker County, Texas Trial Court No. 15 - 0686

ABATEMENT ORDER
A Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, presented by counsel for defendant Jose Estrada (appellee in this appeal), was filed with the Court on April 14, 2016. Counsel states in the motion that he was retained by Estrada. After Estrada’s Motion to Dismiss
for L ack of Speedy Trial was granted by the trial court, counsel was permitted to withdraw as attorney of record. The order permitting withdrawal is not contained in theState v. Estrada Page 2

record on appeal. Further, it is unclear from this appellate record whether appellee is

n ow indigent. An indigent defendant has the right to appointed counsel on appeal, and the appointment of counsel is under the sole authority of the trial court. See Enriquez v. State , 999 S.W.2d 906, 907

- 08 (Tex. App.

— Waco 1999, order); T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P RO C
. A NN
. arts. 1.051(d)(1), 26.04(a) (West Supp. 2014); cf. Meza v. State , 206 S.W.3d 684, 688 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). During an appeal, the trial court retains jurisdiction to appoint counsel for an indigent defendant. See Enriquez , 999 S.W.2d at 908; se e also Meza , 206 S.W.3d at 688. Accordingly, we abate this appeal to the trial court to hold a hearing within 14 days from the date of this Order to consider whether Estrada is indigent and whether counsel should be appointed. Supplemental clerk’s and re porter’s records containing the trial court’s written or oral findings and rulings are ordered to be filed within 28 days of
the date of this Order.
PER CURIAM Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Appeal abated Order issue d and filed April 21, 2016
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 11

                       Service Systems International, Ltd.
                         Computation of Per-Share Income
                              Treasury Stock Method
                            As Modified for 20% Test



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                            PERIOD ENDED  AUGUST 31, 2000
                                                            -----------------------------




<S>                                                                      <C>
Weighted average number of shares outstanding                               18,230,118
                                                                         =============


Total common and common equivalent shares                                   22,307,523
                                                                         =============


Net income (loss) for the period                                         $ (2,101,604)
                                                                         =============


Loss per common and common equivalent shares                             $      (0.12)
                                                                         =============
</TABLE>




Earnings per share:

The earnings per share are computed by dividing the net income (loss) for the
period by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the
period. Common stock equivalents are excluded from the computation if their
effect would be anti-dilutive.
•

e

•

JeAtt d dAttiti.e-aw./.

aft. .14tc44.4144 j Volk .7,11-1 &Attar

zuhef.a. At, 0, -wow )&44Loti•nn

44n644Wft-c41 e0t44•4- .444: AM; •

Csolos ar.,444;4.,

A. ears e Aciedmit_- 424*uniacie7X Am4(44ti.4



74')i

s-dt op: Ai.,•14.-T-sto

 A.,-

A ..c49mo. .f,dicle, 0,

Atiprmsd4- e,..4..;x Aerce.g.s..a

,ceigle 4 r sit./ /do

•
ti

•

• •

p

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

MEMORANDUM

iu,g4442.;n% r

...40$04.0

init"`j A-itaku/

•

I. •

sow •••••••••••••••n••••••••n•Mirr...orm.

•
•

'DI 0228

e 121217 RR d83 RUXPDA 40600 1800030 00000•••XXXX•••RUXPOAA.

to Y XX XX X 888 ZNM

R • 2930291

37

41104

S C 2900292 JUN 77 CAW?

ROL CHANNELS ONLY

OR R AO OM OR COOK

: KEY PER RANGES

I Al VERY PLEA.SED TO CONCUR IN THE APPOINTMENT

oF RAutt um overt M. YOIIELL AS DIRECTOR OF NRO PROGRAM C.

I LOOK F 3R WARD TO MEETING HIM AND WOULD LIKE TO

ARRANGE INDEPTH DISCUSSIONS ON NRO MANAGEMENT AND

89 SYSTEMS Al Ad EARLY DATE.

E..! I MPO ET

BT .

a

NNiIN 1800053

9

V2CZCX4A5430AA001

94

3
**EXHIBIT
      32(a)**





MICROS
      SYSTEMS, INC.





Certification
      of Principal Executive Officer


Pursuant
      to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C.
      1350





In
      connection with the quarterly report of MICROS Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-Q (Form 10-Q”) for the three months ended September 30, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, A.L.
      Giannopoulos, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
      certify that to the best of my knowledge:




(1) The
        Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




(2) The
        information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
        Company.





Date:
              November 9,
              2007
            
            
            /s/A.L.
              GiannopoulosA.L.
              Giannopoulos