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

<ARTICLE>5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
 
<MULTIPLIER>1
       
<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                             9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                              MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                                   DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                                         246,515
<SECURITIES>                                                   939,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                                  378,962
<ALLOWANCES>                                                   22,600
<INVENTORY>                                                    1,088,438
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               3,016,771
<PP&E>                                                         3,155,101
<DEPRECIATION>                                                 1,031,275
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 9,297,291
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                          1,043,334
<BONDS>                                                        3,481,087
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                    0
<COMMON>                                                       323,115
<OTHER-SE>                                                     3,720,888
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   9,297,291
<SALES>                                                        3,033,317
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                               3,282,170
<CGS>                                                          2,730,876
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                  2,730,876
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                             299,354
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                (1,332,176)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   14,890
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                0
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                                   (1,347,066)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                (.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                  0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
32.2 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 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 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Treasurer
 and Chief Financial Officer of Optimal Group Inc. (the Company), does
 hereby certify that to the best of the undersigneds knowledge:1)
the Companys Annual
 Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the Report),
 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the
 Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2)
the information
 contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
 financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Dated:
March 13, 2008

/s/ Gary S. WechslerGary S. WechslerTreasurer andChief Financial Officer
44 IMP

AM-NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE amanurmai

WASHINGTON, D.C.

THE NRO STAFF 4 June 1979

•

MEMORAh "TUM FOR THE DEPUTY DIRECTORS

SUBJECT: Task Items from the Program A Review

The following is a sumaary of the task items for NRO Staff and

SP that resulted from the 25 May discussions concerning Program A's

programs:

Fund Growth - The subject of cost growth in t

support area discussed in detail. SP noted the primary co

were in the 04M and technical services areas. However, the percent use

of th pport has grown proportionately. For example, in the

period 84 the percent of hours used by SAP/SP ranged berweepillp

percent. Mr. Hill discussed with SP what programs use the

port.The r ded the following information:

up to , per year support time and

period noted that he surprised

at these.numbeuat the NRO Staff had been views upport

hours as a decreasing demand usage while the coats were up.

The task for SP was to break out support hours required for each

program for the FY 81 budget. He indicated that for FY 80 the program

should stand as it is but that we were experiencing increasing difficulty

to sell support dollars for FY 81 and that we needed to tie the scope of

increased cost to the use of individual programs.

- Discussions concerning the SSCI and HPSCI mark-ups - Mr. Hill

outlined the specific tasking from the committees and requested that SP

lay out reasonable alternatives to pursue as backups for systems scheduled

SP should submitecommended alternatives

asks for SP was to

nd potential launch schedule if we are forced to us

- Titan/Centaur Pad - Dr. Mark asked SP to determine the

status of the Titan/Centaur Pad Com what it

would take to use it to support the ch in

ear1111111

VIA cLAssireaDelaIMILawr Poem

Shaxrcvnve RAL INCDIJL . .. TI CaIrr40P--SEUErlr----

00111Y III2 DICLAIIIIIPY ON IMF OIL

CONTHOLNO Internal

COPY OF COPIES

PAGE=

OF PAGES
JIMMY E. MORRELL

Major, USAF

Executive

NWat7 *ear

OVNadia aar

(SWOTM Ralf

• 11111.VM? I

CONTROL NO Internal

COPY OF

PAGE_a__oF 2 PAGES
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Buddy Bryant STRADFORD, Appellant.

No. 9758.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued April 9, 1965.

Decided April 22, 1965.

James Woolls, Alexandria, Va. (Court-assigned counsel), for appellant.

Plato Cacheris, First Asst. U. S. Atty. (C. V. Spratley, Jr., U. S. Atty., on brief), for appellee.

Before BRYAN and BELL, Circuit Judges, and STANLEY, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the record and the arguments of counsel on brief and orally, we perceive no error in the judgment under review and we now affirm it.

Affirmed.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-19-0000206

13-JUN-2019

08:15 AM
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 139 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 139

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To permanently allow an exclusion under the Supplemental Security 
 Income program and the Medicaid program for compensation provided to 
  individuals who participate in clinical trials for rare diseases or 
                              conditions.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Ensuring Access to Clinical Trials 
Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF SUNSET PROVISION.

    Effective as if included in the enactment of the Improving Access 
to Clinical Trials Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-255, 124 Stat. 2640), 
section 3 of that Act is amended by striking subsection (e).

            Passed the Senate July 16, 2015.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
114th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 139

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

   To permanently allow an exclusion under the Supplemental Security 
 Income program and the Medicaid program for compensation provided to 
  individuals who participate in clinical trials for rare diseases or 
                              conditions.
```
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-08-00130-CR

Brent Mercer Reed, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 331ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-DC-2005-201556, HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

We grant appellant Brent Mercer Reed’s motion to dismiss his appeal. See Tex. R.

App. P. 42.2(a). The appeal is dismissed.

__________________________________________

Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Puryear and Pemberton

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: November 21, 2008

Do Not Publish
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the quarterly report of Airguide, Inc. (the Company), on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended September 30, 2006, I hereby certify solely for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



1. The quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly presents, in all materials respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date: November 20, 2006



|            |  |                         
|----------- |  | ------------------------
|            |  | /s/   Nicholas J. Malino
|Print Name: |  | Nicholas J. Malino      
|Title:      |  | Chief Executive Officer 
|            |
#### State *v.*Curtis.

*Per euriam*

If a justice of Peace issue a warrant for a matter within his jurisdiction, although he may have acted erroneously in the previous stages, the officer should-éxeeute it; but if it be for a matter not within his jurisdiction, the officer ought not to execute it.

2d. if the officer be a known- officer of that district in which he is acting, lie need not shew his warrant when he makes the arreát; but if he is an officer appointed for a special purpose, he ought to siiow Id's warrant if demanded.

3d. When he makes the arrest, iie should briefly inform the party arrested of the cause — as 1 arrest you at the suit of A. or in behalf of the State — otherwise the arrest is not good. 6 *Rep.*54. 9 *Re.*68 b.

4th. That if a warrant want any circumstance essential to its legal form or constitution, as if it want asea!,’ it is void, and will not justify the officer in making tiie arrest. 1 *Hale 577. Foster*311 312. And as the officer did not tell *Cur Lis*for what he arrested him, and the warrant he had -xas not under seal, *Curtis*who resisted, and beat him for making the arrest, was acquitted;
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.3

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

   We hereby consent to the use in the Prospectus constituting part of this
Registration Statement on Form S-1 of our report dated August 9, 1999 relating
to the financial statements of E-Systems Medical Electronics (a division of
Raytheon E-Systems, Inc.) which appears in such Prospectus.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Boston, Massachusetts

October 7, 1999
<PAGE>




Exhibit 23.2







Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No.  333-16267)  filed on November 18, 1996 pertaining to the Second Amended
and Restated  1996 Stock  Option Plan of Xomed  Surgical  Products,  Inc. of our
report  dated  February 26, 1997,  with  respect to the  consolidated  financial
statements of Xomed Surgical Products,  Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form
10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1996.


                                                Ernst & Young LLP


March 24, 1997
Jacksonville, Florida
EXHIBIT 13.1





SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT


CEO CERTIFICATION





In connection with the annual report of Almaden Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Morgan Poliquin, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





1.           The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








/s/”Morgan Poliquin”





Name: Morgan Poliquin


Title: Chief Executive Officer


March 30, 2015
**EXHIBIT 21.1****SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT**1. Dynamex Operations East Inc., a Delaware corporation — 10,000 authorized shares of commonstock, $0.01 par value, 1,000 of which are issued and outstanding and registered in the nameof Dynamex Inc. 2. Dynamex Operations West Inc., a Delaware corporation — 10,000 authorized shares of commonstock, $0.01 par value, 1,000 of which are issued and outstanding and registered in the nameof Dynamex Inc. 3. Dynamex Canada Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation — 10,000 authorized shares of commonstock, $0.01 par value, 100 of which are issued and outstanding and registered in the name ofDynamex Inc. 4. Dynamex Provincial Couriers, Inc., a Delaware corporation — 10,000 authorized shares ofcommon stock, $0.01 par value, 100 of which are issued and outstanding and registered in thename of Dynamex Inc. 5. Road Runner Transportation, Inc., a Minnesota corporation — 25,000 authorized common shares(consisting of 7,000 voting, 5,000 non-voting and 13,000 undesignated), no par value; of which4,363.9998 non-voting are issued and outstanding in the name of Dynamex Inc., and of which6,545 voting are issued and outstanding in the name of Dynamex Inc. 6. New York Document Exchange Corp., a New York corporation — 200 shares of common stock areauthorized, no par value, of which 150 shares are issued and outstanding in the name ofDynamex Inc. 7. Dynamex Dedicated Fleet Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation — 10,000 authorized shares ofcommon stock, par value $0.01, 1,000 of which are issued and outstanding and registered in thename of Dynamex Inc. 8. Dynamex Fleet Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation — 10,000 authorized shares of commonstock, $0.01 par value, 1,000 of which are issued and outstanding and registered in the name ofDynamex Inc.
NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

14675 Lee Road

Chantilly, VA 20151-1715

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Release 08-11

Contact: (703) 808-5050 September 9, 2011

NRO CELEBRATES 50 YEARS OF NATIONAL SERVICE 

The National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) celebrated 50 years of national 

service with a cake-cutting ceremony on September 8, 2011. The event was part 

of an 18-month commemoration, which will include the formal unveiling of the 

Gambit and Hexagon legacy reconnaissance systems during a gala celebration 

the evening of September 17, at the Smithsonian Institution, National Air and 

Space Museum, Steven F. Udvar Hazy Center, Chantilly, VA.

“Based on the foundation that has been set decades ago, we have a record of 

accomplishments that I think is second to none,” said Mr. Bruce Carlson, Director 

of the NRO. 

Highlighting today’s occasion was a three-foot wide raspberry and vanilla cake

designed by Alli Taylor, of the NRO Systems Engineering Directorate. The 

workforce cast 1,170 votes for five different designs in a contest to choose the 

official cake; Taylor’s design won by 19 votes. “The bakery did an impressive job 

bringing my concept into reality. It was an honor to be a part of this historic event 

and celebrate among legends of the NRO,” said Taylor. Festivities also included 

NRO alumni speeches, historical exhibits, and the unveiling of a 50th Anniversary 

commemorative poster by graphic artist Charles (Chuck) Glover II.

The NRO is a joint Department of Defense-Intelligence Community organization 

responsible for developing, launching, and operating America’s signals, imagery, 

and communications intelligence satellites to meet the needs of our nation. 
NRO Director Bruce Carlson and cake design winner,

Alli Taylor, cutting the official NRO birthday cake

NRO 50th Anniversary cake and commemorative poster
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 19 - 00004 - CV No. 07 - 19 - 00 144 - CV PRIDE NETWORK, INC. , D/B/A NTS COMMUNICA TIONS , AND NTS COMMUNICATIONS, INC., APPELLANT S V. ACRS 2000 CORP., APP ELLEE On Appeal from the 237th District Court Lubbock County, Texas Trial Court No. 2016 - 520,098, Honorable Les Hatch, Presiding



### April 23 , 2019 ORDER OF SEVERANCE AND DISMISSAL Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE , JJ. Appellant s, Pride Network, Inc. d / b / a NTS Communications and NTS Communications, Inc., appeal from the F inal J udgment of the trial court. Appellee, AC R S 2000 Corp., has filed a cross - appeal. Now p ending before th is court is appellants’ motion to voluntarily dismiss their appeal. Without passing on the merits of the case , we grant appellants’ motion pursuant to Texas R ule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a) (1) .2

Accordingly, we sever appellants’ appeal into cause number 07 - 19 - 00 144 - CV and dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at appellants ’ request , no motion for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will i ssue forthwith. T he cross - appeal of ACRS 2000 Corp. shall continue to disposition under appellate cause nu mber 07 - 19 - 00004 - CV. We note that cross - appellant’s brief was due April 5 , 2019 , but was not filed. If cross - appellant’s brief is not filed with the clerk of this court by 5:00 p.m., May 3 , 2019, the cross - appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution . T EX . R. A PP . P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b). N o further extensions will be granted. It is so ordered. Pe r Curiam
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED October 21, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-40680 Conference Calendar

IVERY TRAVENO WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus BRENDA R. WILKINSON, Unit Librarian; SHERMAN BELL, Classification Director, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:02-CV-584

-------------------- Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Ivery Traveno Williams, Texas prisoner No. 183233, moves this court to supplement the district court record. The motion is DENIED. Williams has appealed the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint as frivolous. Williams argues that Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) law librarian Brenda Wilkinson violated his right of access to the courts by denying him face-to-face legal visits with TDCJ inmate James Lewis; thatNo. 03-40680 -2- the Texas Parole Board violated his due process rights by reviewing his eligibility for parole every two years instead of annually; that Ms. Wilkinson retaliated against Williams; and that TDCJ Classification Director Sherman Bell assigned Williams to the wrong prison classification and computed his sentence incorrectly. Williams does not have a right to provide legal assistance to or to receive legal assistance from Inmate Lewis. Bounds v. Smith , 430 U.S. 817, 828 (1976); Tighe v. Wall , 100 F.3d 41, 43 (5th Cir. 1996). We do not address Williams’s argument concerning the Texas Parole Board because he did not raise this issue in the district court. See Leverette v. Louisville Ladder
Co. , 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir. 1999). Williams has not offered evidence or alleged a chronology of events that supports his claim that Ms. Wilkinson retaliated against him. Woods v. Smith , 60 F.3d 1161, 1166 (5th Cir. 1995). Williams’s claims that Mr. Bell assigned him to the wrong prison classification and miscomputed his sentence are not cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because they implicate the duration of Williams’s confinement. Clarke v. Stalder , 154 F.3d 186, 189 (5th Cir. 1998)(en banc).
AFFIRMED; MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD DENIED.
##### 



Exhibit 8.1
 Subsidiary
    
    Jurisdiction of IncorporationSK Teletech Co., Ltd.
    
    KoreaSK Capital Co., Ltd.
    
    KoreaSK Telink Co., Ltd.
    
    KoreaSK Communications Co., Ltd.
    
    KoreaSK Wyverns Baseball Club Co., Ltd.
    
    KoreaCenturion IT Investment Association
    
    KoreaGlobal Credit & Information Corp.
    
    KoreaPAXNet Co., Ltd.
    
    KoreaSeoul Records, Inc.
    
    KoreaSK Telecom International Inc.
    
    KoreaSLD Telecom PTE Ltd.
    
    SingaporeSK Telecom China Co., Ltd.
    
    ChinaTU Media Corp.
    
    KoreaU-Land Company Limited
    
    China (Hong Kong)SK Telecom USA Holdings, Inc.
    
    U.S.A.The First Music Investment Fund of SK-PVC
    
    KoreaThe Second Music Investment Fund of SK-PVC
    
    KoreaSK-KTB Music Investment Fund
    
    KoreaIMM Cinema Fund
    
    Korea
#### Kendhammer, Respondent, vs. Wolf, Appellant.

For the appellant: *F. E. Withrow*and *Hale & Burke,*all of La Crosse.

For the respondent: *George H. Gordon, Law & Gordon,*all of La Crosse.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.

A motion for a rehearing was denied, with $25 costs, on March 5, 1935.
EXHIBIT 13.2
                                                                    ------------


               ASIA SATELLITE TELECOMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS LIMITED

                            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 Asia Satellite  Telecommunications  Holdings Limited (the
"Company")  Annual  Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended  December  31,
2005 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  I, Sue Yeung,  certify  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 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  results of  operations  of the
       Company.


June 15, 2007


                                                /s/ Sue Yeung
                                                --------------------
                                                Sue Yeung
                                                Chief Financial Officer