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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements as of and for the three months ended March 31,
1999, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             149
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,428
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (126)
<INVENTORY>                                      5,233
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,986
<PP&E>                                           4,092
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,664)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  12,974
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,710
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           303
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,961
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,974
<SALES>                                          4,883
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,883
<CGS>                                            2,789
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,758
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 122
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      3
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  3
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         3
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
REF ID:A65448 

Mr. Gilbart s. Venmm 

TM 'Weatern Union 'l'elegraph eompany 

60 lludlon Street 

IW York 131 Nev York 

n.a,r Mr. Vernam: 

!lO Second Street, S.E. 

'Waahillgton 31 D. ¢. 

14 May 195l+ 

I wu very p~ to t1rd yeeUerday in '!trf ~ •11 

1our letter at May 12 ..nd. lix ot the eiaht pe.tenta li•ted 

in your letter ~ April 21. I wish to thank ycu mOttt 

hee.rlily tor your oourtea;y. 

lt you can get copie• at the tvo patenta 1till to be 

0btained, I 'WOU1.d be very happy to neeive thon 8.110 in 

4~ coune. 

I One thing, thaugh.; l .must u.yi you ar& too ll(>d.eat 

in rnpect to YbrerQ you put your a.utogra.ph. I h&d hoped 

that you would Yl"ite •01'.Mthillg on the front eCIVer t'1t ea.eh 

¢ne--ts~thing to the ettaot that you vere preecnting tha 

d.OCtlll*ttt to m to add to my colleet1on or out.t&nd.ine; o:r not~hy 1te• in the cryptographic field. Don't forget 

that the- "Vernam principlett and the 11Verna.m rull!" are n°'1 

vorld .. vide in the litera.tur& and. you ahould. be right!'U.lly 

-pr~M ~ that t&ot. I• 

,, ~ 'With n,iteraW thMka, ! u, 

I 

' 

(" I' 

I 

Sincerely }"O'll.X'#, 

@'pproved for Release by NSA on 07-23-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a 

;'1-

1 

I 

r
Dismissed and Opinion Filed May 3, 2023 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-22-00441-CV CYRUS NDOWO, Appellant V. SSK TRUST, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 6 Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 006-00848-2022 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Smith, and Breedlove Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness On August 29, 2022, we in formed appellant his brief was deficient in that, among other defects, it did not concisely st ate all issues or points presented for review or include citations to the appellate record or legal authorities in support of the arguments appellant made. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.1(g),(i). We directed appellant to file a corrected brief within ten days and cautioned him that failure to comply could result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. See id . 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b),(c). Appellant did not comply and did not file a corrected brief. Appellee filed a response brief and prayed, in part, th at this Court dismiss the appeal due to–2– insufficient briefing. Appella nt did not respond to appellee’s brief or the request that we dismiss the appeal. Appellant has had more than ninety days to file the corrected brief but has failed to do so. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal. See id . 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b),(c).

220441F.P05 /Robbie Partida-Kipness / ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT CYRUS NDOWO, Appellant

No. 05-22-00441-CV V. SSK TRUST, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 6, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 006-00848- 2022.Opinion delivered by Justice PartidaKipness. Justices Smith and Breedlove participating. In accordance with this Court’s opi nion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction.
Judgment entered this 3rd day of May 2023.
## NO. 12

- 18

- 00063

- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF ALMA HER NANDEZ AND JODY MCCREARY AN D IN THE INTEREST OF L. M., A CHILD §

§

§ APPEAL FROM THE 321S T

JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

SMI TH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate

Procedure. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c).

On March 21, 2018 , the clerk of this Court notified Appellant , Jody McCreary, tha t the filing fee in this appeal is due. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 5. Appellant was informed that failure to remit the filing fee on or before April 2, 2018 , would result in the Court’s taking appropriate action, including dismissal of the case without further no tice. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c). The date for remitting the filing fee has passed, and Appellant has not complied with the Court’s request or otherwise responded to our March 21 notice

. Because Appellant has failed, after notice, to comply with Rule 5, the appeal is

dismissed

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c). Opinion delivered April 11, 2018. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

( PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

APRIL 11 , 2018

NO. 12

- 18

- 00063

- CV

IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF ALMA HER NANDEZ AND JODY MCCREARY AND IN THE INT EREST OF L. M., A CHILD

Appeal from the 321st District Court of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 17

- 1505

- D)

THIS CAUS E came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismis sed ; and that this decision be certified to the court

below for observance.

By per curiam opinion

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
### Fw: Revisions to the Administrator 's conclusions on NOx/SOx per our discussion at 4 PM Jan King to: Sherry Russell 07/12/2011 09:14 AM 

### Jan King Regulatory Development and Policy Analysis Group phone: (919) 541-5665 fax: (919) 541-2664 Mailcode: C404-05
----- Forwarded by Jan King/RTP/USEPA/US on 07/12/2011 09:11 AM -----

From: Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US To: "Laity, James A." <James

_ A.

_ Laity@omb.eop.gov>, "Mancini, Dominic J." <Dominic

_J.

_ Mancini@omb.eop.gov> Cc: John Hannon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Janet McCabe/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lea Anderson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Rich Scheffe/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ginger Tennant/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Jan King/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman <wegman.lydia@epa.gov> Date: 07/11/2011 06:01 PM Subject: Revisions to the Administrator's conclusions on NOx/SOx per our discussion at 4 PM 

### Jim and Dom, Attached are revisions to the Administrator's proposed conclusions section which we discussed at our 4 PM meeting today. The changes appear on pages 83-88. Please let us know if these work for you and if you have comments on any of the other revisions we have made to respond to your comments. Thanks a lot. Lydia
# C_2014378EN.01000201.xml

| 24.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 378/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 378/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7390 — OFI Infravia/GDF Suez/PensionDanmark/NGT)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 378/02

On 17 October 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in the English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7390. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7390. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
# C_2014304EN.01000201.xml

| 9.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 304/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

8 September 2014

2014/C 304/02

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2947 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 136,32 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4456 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,80235 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,1732 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2069 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,1540 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,637 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 313,85 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1770 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4095 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,8032 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3870 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4119 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,0342 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5590 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6248 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 328,16 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,9193 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,9517 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6250 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 180,23 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,1116 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,428 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 48,0850 |
| THB | Thai baht | 41,460 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,9041 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,9120 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 78,0040 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2947

JPY

Japanese yen

136,32

DKK

Danish krone

7,4456

GBP

Pound sterling

0,80235

SEK

Swedish krona

9,1732

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2069

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,1540

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,637

HUF

Hungarian forint

313,85

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1770

RON

Romanian leu

4,4095

TRY

Turkish lira

2,8032

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3870

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4119

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,0342

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5590

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6248

KRW

South Korean won

1 328,16

ZAR

South African rand

13,9193

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,9517

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6250

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 180,23

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,1116

PHP

Philippine peso

56,428

RUB

Russian rouble

48,0850

THB

Thai baht

41,460

BRL

Brazilian real

2,9041

MXN

Mexican peso

16,9120

INR

Indian rupee

78,0040

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

WILLIAM J. WEBB, JR., 

Defendant BelowAppellant, 

v. 

STATE OF DELAWARE, 

Plaintiff BelowAppellee.

§ 

§ No. 396, 2016 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ Court Below—Superior Court 

§ of the State of Delaware 

§ 

§ Cr. ID Nos. 91000534DI 

§ and 9907017204 

§

 Submitted: October 21, 2016 

 Decided: November 21, 2016 

Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VAUGHN, and SEITZ, Justices. 

ORDER

 This 21st day of November 2016, the Court has considered the

appellant’s opening brief, the State’s motion to affirm, and the record below. 

We have determined that the Superior Court’s order denying the appellant’s 

motion for postconviction relief should be affirmed on the basis of and for 

the reason assigned by the Superior Court in its Order dated July 14, 2016. 

The appellant is no longer in custody under either sentence for which he 

sought postconviction relief.1

 Thus, his request for relief is moot.2

 

1

The appellant was discharged from probation in Cr. ID 91000534DI in February 1992. 

He was discharged from probation in Cr. ID 9907017204 in February 2010. 

2 Watson v. State, 2015 WL 1456771 (Del. Mar. 30, 2015). 
2

 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 

Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 

 BY THE COURT: 

 /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr.

 Justice
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7035

BOBBY CLIFTON SETZER, JR.,

 Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

HAROLD W. CLARKE,

 Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District 

Judge. (2:15-cv-00517-RAJ-RJK)

Submitted: November 17, 2016 Decided: November 22, 2016

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit 

Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bobby Clifton Setzer, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Donald Eldridge 

Jeffrey, III, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Bobby Clifton Setzer, Jr., seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012)

petition. The district court referred this case to a magistrate 

judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012). The 

magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised 

Setzer that failure to file timely objections to this 

recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court 

order based upon the recommendation.

The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate 

judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review 

of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have 

been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Wright v. 

Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Setzer has waived appellate 

review by failing to file objections. Accordingly, we deny a 

certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. 

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.

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2222 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2222

    To amend title 5, United States Code, to lower the standard for 
    removing employees who disclose tax return information without 
                 authorization, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 24, 2021

  Mr. Braun (for himself and Mr. Cruz) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title 5, United States Code, to lower the standard for 
    removing employees who disclose tax return information without 
                 authorization, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Protect Taxpayers' Privacy Act''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE OF PENALTY FOR UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF TAXPAYER 
              INFORMATION.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 7213(a) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``$5,000'' and inserting 
``$250,000''.
    (b) Disclosures by Tax Return Preparers.--Subsection (a) of section 
7216 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 
``$1,000 ($100,000 in the case of a disclosure or use to which section 
6713(b) applies)'' and inserting ``$250,000''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to disclosures made on or after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.

SEC. 3. REMOVAL.

    (a) In General.--Section 7701(c)(1)(A) of title 5, United States 
Code, is amended by inserting ``or in the case of an action involving a 
removal from the service for an alleged violation of section 7213(a)(1) 
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,'' after ``described in section 
4303,''.
    (b) Rule of Construction.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
may not be construed to permit an officer or employee of the United 
States to submit an appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board if 
that individual is dismissed from office or discharged from employment 
upon conviction for a violation of section 7213(a)(1) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986.
                                 <all>
```
REF ID:A66707 

Tv1 · S .... b1 <~ ~·; . :OP SiC&i'I SICURlR ~91f ll Janu.arr 1952 

~gsAHRUM ro MR. FRIEDMAJI 

SUBJl!XJTa Report .troa AFSA..02X 

l.. fha specifi.c purpose ot the report was to proride RADM Wenger with 

& succinct. outline ot the knowledge available to the .Assistant tor Special. 

Liaison to :m'.e '.Dliector, Office ot Operations (02X) on the COMINT capabilities 

ot the west.em European Powers. 

I. The report has the further purpose or serving aa an ov&r'-all, 

prfil1minaey Bll1'Y8,1 to 11hich inf'ormation may be added as it is accumulated. 

It. is expected tha. t from tim.e to time pag~s mq be issued lihich will be 

llUbatituted tor those in the present manual. The subject report differs 

.trom previous reports in respect to (a) brevity- (b) limitatio..~ to current 

1Df'ormation (c) its attempt to codi;ty tbe inrormation aDi (d) a f'orma.t which 

J.mris itaelt to the maintenance ot the intorm.ation on a current basis • 

. / 

PL 86-36/50 USC 3605 

EO 3 . 3 ( h) ( 2 ) 

eclassifi ed and a roved for release b NSA on 11-17-2014 ursuant to E .0. 1352
# C_2014374EN.01000101.xml

| 22.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 374/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 374/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7392 — Advent International/Corialis)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2014/C 374/01)

On 14 October 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7392. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7392. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
**EXHIBIT 32.3**

 

**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 Iomega Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 1, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jonathan S. Huberman, Vice Chairman and 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; 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/ Jonathan S. Huberman

Jonathan S. Huberman

Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

May 10, 2007

 

This certification accompanies this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that Iomega Corporation specifically incorporates it by reference.

 

----