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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF CANDLEWOOD HOTEL COMPANY, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                      33,497,118
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  142,584
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            33,910,981
<PP&E>                                       4,104,477
<DEPRECIATION>                                 142,490
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              51,673,943
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,832,152
<BONDS>                                     15,435,819
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        90,250
<OTHER-SE>                                  33,315,722
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                51,673,943
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               685,697
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  365,692
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,920,100
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              80,926
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,352,974)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,352,974)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,352,974)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.23)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


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 Superclick, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending April 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Periodic Report"), I, Jean Perrotti, Chief Financial 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:





1.           the Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Dated:  June 8, 2011
/s/ Jean PerrottiName:  Jean PerrottiTitle: Chief Financial OfficerAnd Principle Accounting Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

# AGENCY:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice of public meeting cancellation.

# SUMMARY:

The Advisory Committee on Commercial Remote Sensing (ACCRES) meeting on April 28, 2015 is cancelled.

# DATES:

Date and Time: The cancelled meeting will be rescheduled in May or June of 2015.

# ADDRESSES:

                        The meeting location will be announced at the time the new meeting announcement is placed in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

As required by section 10(a) (2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1982), notice is hereby given of the meeting of ACCRES. ACCRES was established by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) on May 21, 2002, to advise the Secretary through the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere on long- and short-range strategies for the licensing of commercial remote sensing satellite systems.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Tahara Dawkins, NOAA/NESDIS/CRSRA, 1335 East West Highway, Room 8260, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910; telephone (301) 713-3385, fax (301) 713-1249, email                         *Tahara.Dawkins@noaa.gov,*                         or Richard James at telephone (301) 713-0572, email                         *Richard.James@noaa.gov.*

Tahara Dawkins,

Director Commercial Remote Sensing and Regulatory Affairs.

[FR Doc. 2015-07875 Filed 4-6-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE CODE 3510-HR-P
#### JAMES A. MAXWELL, Respondent, *vs.*OWEN WESSELLS, et al. Appellants.

APPEAL PROM DANE CIRCUIT COTTRT.

A copy of the bond or undertaking for appeal mast be served upon the attorney of the opposite party ; a failure in this respect is good cause for dismissing the appeal.

Motion to dismiss the appeal taken in the case. The case appears in the opinion of the court.

*J. G. Knapp,*for Appellants.

*Abbott c&*Clark, for Respondent.

*By the Court,*

Cole J.

When this case was called up for argument, a motion was pending therein to dismiss, the appeal, and although the respondent insisted upon his motion it was understood that it was to be submitted with the case itself. We have, therefore, first to consider the merits of the motion to dismiss.

The ground relied upon to sustain the motion is, that no copy of any bond or undertaking on appeal has been served upon the attorneys for the respondent, as required by § 250 of the code. That section of the code requires, in the most clear and explicit terms, that a copy of the undertaking prescribed by § 244 to be given to render an appeal effectual for any purpose, including the names and residence of the sureties shall be served on the adverse party with the notice of *104appeal, unless, &c. It is essential that a copy of the undertaking be served upon the adverse party under this provision. It gives the respondent an opportunity of objecting to the sufficiency of the sureties named in the undertaking when a copy of that instrument is served upon him. And we deem it a highly salutary as well as indispensable step in the proceedings to perfect an appeal, that a copy of the undertaking be served upon the adverse party. And because that copy has not been served in the present case the appeal must be dismissed.

For the purpose of resisting the motion to dismiss the appeal, the counsel for the appellants has filed an affidavit, wherein he states, that he made copies of the undertaking and of the notice of appeal, and gave instructions to Wm. B. Jarvis to serve them as required by law, and that if they have not been served it is owing to the mistake of the said Jarvis, and not to an intentional neglect to comply with the provision of the code referred to. And the counsel in his affidavit requests, that if this court shall be of opinion that he ought to serve a copy of said undertaking upon the attorneys of the respondent, that he have leave of court to make the service. If a copy of the undertaking had been served upon the adverse party, and proper evidence of that fact produced before the motion to dismiss the appeal on that ground had been submitted, we might well have been called upon to determine in passing upon the motion to dismiss, whether the original mistake or omission had not been cured. But this not having been done the appellant has not placed himself in a position to resist the motion, and the appeal must be dismissed.
Barley 2022

Planted Acres by County

for Selected States

U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service

Acres

Not Estimated

< 2,500

2,500 - 4,999

5,000 - 9,999

10,000 - 19,999

20,000 - 39,999

40,000 +
NUMBER 13-15-00081-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

JUAN GABRIEL ESPRONCEDA, Appellant,

v.

SYLVIA SUE HANDY ESPRONCEDA, Appellee.

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

of Hidalgo County, Texas

ORDER ABATING APPEAL

Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Perkes

Order Per Curiam

This cause is before the Court on the appellant’s unopposed motion to abate the 

appeal to allow the parties the opportunity to engage in informal mediation. The Court, 

having examined and fully considered the documents on file and the unopposed motion 
2

to abate, is of the opinion that the motion to abate the appeal should be granted. The 

motion to abate the appeal is GRANTED and this appeal is ordered ABATED until May 

18, 2015. 

The Court directs appellant to file, on or before May 18, 2015, either (1) a motion 

to reinstate the appeal, or (2) a motion to dismiss the appeal pursuant to settlement. 

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 

2nd day of April, 2015.
EX-10.1



 Exhibit 10.1 

 
 



 
 April 23, 2013 
 Mr. Richard Van Kirk 
 34 Deer Creek 
 Irvine, California 92604 
 Dear Rick: 
 With approval of the Board of Directors of Pro-Dex, Inc. (the “Company”), I am pleased to inform you of your appointment to the position of Chief Operating Officer under the terms and conditions
described in this letter. 
 Date of Appointment 
 Your additional responsibilities as described above will begin on April 23, 2013 (“Date of Appointment”). 
 Base Compensation 
 Your base rate of pay will be increased, effective as of the Date
of Appointment, to $6,923.08, payable bi-weekly, for an annual base compensation of $180,000. 
 Bonus/Incentive Compensation

 You will continue to be eligible to participate in all Board approved incentive compensation plans open to participation for senior
executives of the Company, subject to the terms and provisions of the applicable plan documents covering any such plans. The terms of such plans may be changed from time to time at the discretion of the Board. Currently, the Company offers the
Annual Incentive Plan and Long Term Incentive Plan, in which you currently participate. 
 You will continue to not be eligible to participate
in the Company-wide employee quarterly bonus/non-qualified profit sharing plan. 
 Other 

All other terms of your current employment with the Company (including, without limitation, your employment letter dated January 6, 2006 (except for
the base compensation and bonus/incentive compensation provisions modified by this letter) and Change of Control Agreement dated July 19, 2011) remain unchanged. By entering into this letter, you confirm your understanding that your employment
will be on an “at-will” basis meaning that either you 







 
or the Company may terminate the employment relationship at any time for any reason with or without notice or Cause, and that neither you nor the Company has entered into any other agreement
regarding the duration of your employment. 
 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 







 If the terms of this letter are agreeable to you, please sign in the space provided below indicating your
understanding of and agreement to the provisions of this offer of employment and return it to me no later than April 23, 2013. 
  

	
	Sincerely,
	
	/s/ Harold A. Hurwitz
	
	Harold A. Hurwitz
	Chief Executive Officer

 I have read the above terms of this offer of employment and I accept and agree to them. 

 

					
	 /s/ Richard Van Kirk
	 		 	 April 23, 2013

	Richard Van Kirk	 		 	Date
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2512 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2512

To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide for a code of conduct 
      for justices and judges of the courts of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 28, 2021

Mr. Murphy (for himself, Mr. Markey, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Cortez Masto, Ms. 
 Hirono, Ms. Klobuchar, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Wyden, Mr. 
Casey, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Merkley, Mr. Leahy, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Booker, 
Mr. Menendez, and Mr. Sanders) introduced the following bill; which was 
       read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide for a code of conduct 
      for justices and judges of the courts of the United States.

    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 ``Supreme Court Ethics Act''.

SEC. 2. CODE OF CONDUCT.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 57 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 964. Code of conduct
    ``Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this 
section, the Judicial Conference of the United States shall issue a 
code of conduct, which applies to each justice and judge of the courts 
of the United States, except that the code of conduct may include 
provisions that are applicable only to certain categories of judges or 
justices.''.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for 
chapter 57 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding after 
the item related to section 963 the following:

``964. Code of conduct.''.
                                 <all>
```
Rockingham

No. 83-504

#### The State of New Hampshire v. Wycliffe L. Desmond

August 13, 1984

*Gregory H. Smith,*attorney general *(Robert B. Muh,*attorney, on the brief and orally), for the State.

*Cullity & Kelley,*of Manchester *(John C. Boeckeler*on the brief and orally), for the defendant.

Memorandum Opinion

In 1976 the defendant executed an acknowledgement-of-rights form and pleaded guilty to a charge of unlawful sale of a controlled drug. RSA 318-B:2 (Supp. 1981). The indictment charging the defendant did not allege a culpable mental state. The defendant was represented by counsel and no objection, exception, or motion to quash the indictment was made at that time.

In 1983 the defendant filed a motion in the superior court to bring forward and vacate the judgment. The defendant argued in his motion that because the indictment failed to allege a culpable mental state it was invalid and.that, therefore, the superior court lacked jurisdiction to enter the judgment. The Superior Court *(Bean,*J.) dismissed the defendant’s motion, and he brought this appeal. We affirm.

We have repeatedly stated that we will not consider on appeal issues not raised by exception, objection or motion in the trial court. *See State v. Hopps,*123 N.H. 541, 545-46, 465 A.2d 1206, 1209 (1983); *see also State v. Little,*123 N.H. 433, 437, 462 A.2d 117, 119 (1983); *State v. Glidden,*123 N.H. 126, 132, 459 A.2d 1136, 1140 (1983). By his motion, the defendant is attempting to raise on appeal an issue not presented to the original trial court more than *seven*
      *449years ago. The scope of our review is well settled, and we will not depart from it.

*Affirmed.*
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed February 08, 2017.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D16-2284

Lower Tribunal No. 11-23587

________________

Erick Pacheco,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the

Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Daryl E. Trawick, Judge.

Erick Pacheco, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before WELLS, ROTHENBERG, and LAGOA, JJ.

ROTHENBERG, J.
Erick Pacheco (“Pacheco”) was convicted of lewd and lascivious

molestation on a child between the age of twelve and sixteen (Count 1); lewd and

lascivious conduct on a child twelve to sixteen years of age by the defendant who

was eighteen years of age or older (Count 3); and lewd and lascivious battery on a

child less than sixteen years of age (Count 4).1 The record reflects that the victim

was thirteen or fourteen years old and Pacheco was thirty-eight years old when

Pacheco committed the charged offenses upon the victim.

On direct appeal, this Court affirmed the convictions for the offenses

charged in Counts 1 and 4, but based on the State’s proper confession of error

(double jeopardy grounds), this Court reversed the conviction for the offense

charged in Count 3 with instructions to the trial court to vacate the conviction and

sentence imposed for Count 3, recalculate Pacheco’s sentencing scoresheet, and

resentence Pacheco. Pacheco v. State, 170 So. 3d 913 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015). The

trial court fully complied with this Court’s directive and substantially reduced

Pacheco’s sentence.

Pacheco now appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion for

postconviction relief, in which Pacheco alleged eleven separate grounds of

ineffective assistance of trial counsel, which he contends requires a new trial. 

After review of Pacheco’s motion, the State’s lengthy (seventy-seven page) and

1 During trial, the trial court granted a judgment of acquittal as to Count 2 on

double jeopardy grounds.

2
very thorough response, the record, the relevant statutes and case law, and the trial

court’s order, we find no error and affirm. The claims raised by Pacheco were

refuted by the record and/or were without merit.

Affirmed.

3
To:

Cc:

Bcc:

Subject: Re: Fung PM Data - Response to Request

From: Karen Fung <kfung@uwindsor.ca>

To: Rebecca Yang/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 12/01/2009 01:56 PM

Subject: Re: Request for PM Air Quality Data Follow Up

I am retired already. You can get the data from Environment Canada yourself.

Karen fung
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 15, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-11265

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

1997 CADILLAC DEVILLE, etc.; ET AL,

Defendants,

FREDERICO GONZALEZ, also known as Viejon,

Claimant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas

(3:04-CV-648)

--------------------

Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

AFFIRMED. See Fifth Circuit Rule 47.6.
Adams, Kevin (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Devany, Dennis (OST) 

Friday, January 21, 2011 6:07 AM 

Adams, Kevin (OST) 

Subject: FW: Renewal of Alaska Airlines to Provide Essential Air Services in Southeast Alaska 

o 

From:" cheryl haynes [mailto:cheryl.haynes@akics.orgJ 

Sent: Thu 1/20/2011 9:32 PM 

To: LaHood, Ray (OST) 

Cc: Kurland, Susan (OST); Devany, Dennis (OST); sean.parnell@alaska.gov; marc.luiken@alaska.gov-commissioner 

Subject: Renewal of Alaska Airlines to Provide Essential Air Services in Southeast Alaska 

JANUARY 20, 2011 

THE HONORABLE RAY LAHOOD 

SECRETARY, US DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 

1200 NEW JERSEY AVE SE 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 

J> 

W 

N 

RE: CONTRIBUTION OF ALASKA AIRLINES' ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE AT CORDOVA, GUSTAVUS, PETERSBURG, WRANGELL, 

AND YAKUTAT, ALASKA; DOCKET OST-1998-4899 

DEAR SECRETARY LAHOOD, 

THIS LEDER IS TO EXPRESS STRONG SUPPORT OF THE ELECTION OF ALASKA AIRLINES TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE 

ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY. 

IN ADDITION TO THE OBVIOUS NEEDS OF ANY REMOTE COMMUNITY, ALASKA AIRLINES BRINGS THE DRUGS WE NEED 

ON A DAILY BASIS FROM SEADLE. ANY CUT IN SERVICE OR REROUTE OR ALTERNATE ROUTES BY ANOTHER CARRIER 

WILL ABSOLUTELY AFFECT THE HEALTHCARE IN OUR COMMUNITY. I AM THE PHARMACIST AT ALASKA ISLAND 

COMMUNITY SERVICES AND SOMETIMES DELAYS, EVEN FOR 2 OR 3 DAYS, CAN BE CRUCIAL TO A PATIENT. ALASKA 

AIRLINE FLIES TO MANY REMOTE AREAS RELIABLY AND GREATLY ENHANCES OUR WELLBEING AND QUALITY OF LIFE. 

THEIR WILLINGNESS TO PROVIDE CARGO AS WELL AS PASSENGER SERVICE, THEIR ABILITY TO ACCESS AIRPORTS DURING 

INCLEMNET WEATHER-THEY ARE EQUIPPED WITH SPECIALIZED TECHNOLOGY-ENABLE PRODUCTS AND PEOPLE TO 

REACH THE COMMUNITY. 

I RESPECTFULLY URGE DOT TO SELECT ALASKA AIRLINEs TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE TO 

SOUTHEAST ALASKA, AS IT HAS DONE FOR OVER 30 YEARS. 

SINCERELY, 

CHERYL HAYNES, RPH 

POB 1222 

WRANGELL, AK 99929 

907-874-5005 

1
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 314 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 314

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
             To repeal the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act.

    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 ``Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Repeal 
Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL.

    Public Law 89-224 (commonly known as the ``Klamath Tribe Judgment 
Fund Act'') (79 Stat. 897) is repealed.

SEC. 3. DISBURSEMENT OF REMAINING FUNDS.

    Notwithstanding any provision of Public Law 89-224 (79 Stat. 897) 
(as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act) 
relating to the distribution or use of funds, as soon as practicable 
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior 
shall disburse to the Klamath Tribe the balance of any funds that, on 
or before the date of enactment of this Act, were appropriated or 
deposited into the trust accounts for remaining legal fees and 
administration and per capita trust accounts, as identified by the 
Secretary of the Interior, under that Act (as in effect on the day 
before the date of enactment of this Act).

            Passed the Senate May 26, 2021.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
117th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 314

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

             To repeal the Klamath Tribe Judgment Fund Act.
```