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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999             JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999             JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           3,604                   7,607
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,454                     476
<ALLOWANCES>                                       120                      15
<INVENTORY>                                      5,472                     898
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,651                   9,168
<PP&E>                                           4,659                   2,980
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (2,374)                 (1,576)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  23,965                  10,667
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,066                   1,298
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           40,495                  34,743
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             4                       4
<OTHER-SE>                                     (39,018)                (25,378)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    23,965                  10,667
<SALES>                                         14,828                   3,370
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,828                   3,370
<CGS>                                           14,344                   2,160
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   18,787                  10,485
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    10                       6
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,092                      10
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (26,405)                 (9,291)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (26,405)                 (9,291)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (26,405)                 (9,291)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (6.87)                  (2.86)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (6.87)                  (2.86)


</TABLE>
## Coal Production for the Electric Power Sector by Region, 2007-2009

(million short tons)

Region 2007 2008 2009 Appalachia 282 283 246 Interior 136 132 129 West 591 596 553 Unknown 0 U.S. Total 1,009 1,012 929 Waste Coal 14 14 14 U.S. Total w/Waste Coal 1,023 1,026 942

Source: See notes on worksheets for for individual years

## Coal Production for the Electric Power Sector by Region, 2009

(million short tons)

Region Short tons Million short tons Appalachia 246,086,240 246 Interior 129,377,025 129 West 553,115,391 553 Unknown 285,344 0 U.S. Total 928,864,000 929 Waste Coal 13,665,587 14 U.S. Total w/Waste Coal 942,529,587 942

Source: Production: U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Coal Distribution

-- Annual (Final)
, web site http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/coaldistrib/a_distributions.html (posted February 18, 2011); Waste Coal: U.S. EIA, Monthly Energy Review, January 2011 Edition, Table 6.1 Coal Overview
, web site http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/coal.html (posted January 31, 2011).

## Coal Production for the Electric Power Sector by Region, 2008

(million short tons)

Region Short tons Million short tons Appalachia 283,258,076 283 Interior 132,286,950 132 West 596,350,127 596 U.S. Total 1,011,895,153 1,012 Waste Coal 14,145,556 14 U.S. Total w/Waste Coal 1,026,040,709 1,026

Source: Production: U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Annual Coal Distribution Back Issues
, web site http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/coaldistrib/coal_distributions.html ; Waste Coal: U.S. EIA, Monthly Energy Review, January 2011 Edition, Table 6.1 Coal Overview
, web site http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/coal.html (posted January 31, 2011).

## Coal Production for the Electric Power Sector by Region, 2007

(million short tons)

Region Short tons Million short tons Appalachia 282,322,103 282 Interior 135,743,727 136 West 590,630,630 591 U.S. Total 1,008,696,460 1,009 Waste Coal 14,076,027 14 U.S. Total w/Waste Coal 1,022,772,487 1,023

Source: Production: See worksheet labelled 'Derivation of 2007 Data'. ; Waste Coal: U.S. EIA, Monthly Energy Review, January 2011 Edition, Table 6.1 Coal Overview
, web site http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/coal.html (posted January 31, 2011).

### Coal Receipts by Major Coal Supply

Region and Sector, 2007 (million short tons)

Cmmreg 2007 Other Industrial Coke

Plants Res/Comm Exports Total NonElec Electric Power Sector Appalachia 378.489 23.843 20.200 1.712 50.412 96.167 282.322 Interior 147.134 10.462 0.042 0.876 0.011 11.390 135.744 West 621.012 20.703 0.000 0.938 8.740 30.381 590.631 U.S. Total 1,146.635 55.008 20.242 3.526 59.163 137.939 1,008.696
Paul MEYER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4431

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 18, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

As the petitioner at the commissioner's hearing on April 17, 2018, voluntarily withdrew the petition for belated appeal, the petition is dismissed.

LaROSE, C.J., and KELLY and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
Tory M. ELLIOTT v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

CR-16-0395

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

May 26, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1423 

To amend title 1, United States Code, to provide for a definition of the 

term ‘‘State’’ and to include territories therein, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 26, 2021 

Ms. PLASKETT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 1, United States Code, to provide for a 

definition of the term ‘‘State’’ and to include territories 

therein, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. THE TERM ‘‘STATE’’ TO INCLUDE TERRITORIES 

4 FOR PURPOSES OF FEDERAL LAW. 

5 (a) THE TERM ‘‘STATE’’ TO INCLUDE TERRI6 TORIES.—Chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is 

7 amended by adding at the end the following: 

8 ‘‘§ 9. Rule of construction regarding the term ‘State’ 

9 ‘‘In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, 

10 or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the varVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:44 Apr 01, 2021 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1423.IH H1423

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1423 IH

1 ious administrative bureaus and agencies of the United 

2 States, the term ‘State’ shall include any territory of the 

3 United States, unless the statute, rule, regulation, or in4 terpretation explicitly excludes the territories from the def5 inition of the term or otherwise precludes their inclusion.’’. 

6 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

7 for such chapter is amended by adding at the end the fol8 lowing: 

‘‘9. Rule of construction regarding the term ‘State’.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
From: Jones, Danielle [mailto:Danielle_Y_Jones@omb.eop.gov] 

Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 11:15 AM

To: Cogliano, Gerain <Cogliano.Gerain@epa.gov>

Subject: EO 12866/13563 Interagency Review: Modernization of the Accidental Release Prevention 

Regulations Under Clean Air Act (RIN 2050-AG82)

Gerain,

Below are some minor edits to a request for comment. All edits are in red.

Finally EPA seeks comment on whether there are other sectors that should be subject to the 

proposed STAA provision. For example, should EPA require RMP regulated water supply or 

wastewater treatment facilities to analyze safer technology and alternatives and document 

feasibility of the alternatives? If so, commenters are encouraged to provide data on the 

feasibility, costs, and potential benefits of requiring STAA for these additional facilities. 

Danielle Y. Jones

Policy Analyst

Office of Management and Budget

Phone: (202) 395-1741 | djones@omb.eop.gov
Bilal Hasson LEVERETT, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D18-0100

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 5, 2018

Bilal Hasson Leverett, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Steven E. Woods, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is denied on the merits.

Wolf, Lewis, and Ray, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 32**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

** 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**ANDEXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(b)**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Option Care, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission as of the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Rajat Rai, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, and Paul Mastrapa, Senior Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of our knowledge,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoped pursuant to Secion 906 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b) that:

 

(1)               This Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange act of 1934; and

 

(2)                The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 
| Date: May 10, 2005 | By:    | /s/ Rajat Rai                    |   |
|-------------------------|--------|----------------------------------|--------|
|                    |   | Rajat Rai                        |   |
|                    |   | Chief Executive Officer          |   |
|                    |   |                             |   |
| Date: May 10, 2005 | By:    | /s/ Paul Mastrapa                |   |
|                    |   | Paul Mastrapa                    |   |
|                    |   | Senior Vice President  and Chief |   |
|                    |   | Financial Officer                |   |

 

1

----
**EXHIBIT 32**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Tasker Capital Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Richard Falcone, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Stathis Kouninis, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

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

(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company as of and for the periods presented in the Report.

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by theCompany and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staffupon request.
| October 26, 2006 | /s/ Richard  Falcone     |   |
|------------------|--------------------------|--------|
|             | Richard Falcone          |
|             | Chief Executive  Officer |
|             |                     |
| October 26, 2006 | /s/ Stathis  Kouninis    |   |
|             | Stathis Kouninis         |
|             | Chief Financial  Officer |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0001084915
<NAME> UNITED AMERICAS BANKSHARES, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         333,512
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             4,390,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  6,720,689
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         330,000
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        147,846
<ALLOWANCE>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,397,842
<DEPOSITS>                                   2,712,784
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             41,673
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (892,576)
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              13,397,842
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,140
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              105,507
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               130,933
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               238,580
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              17,092
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              78,497
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          160,083
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                834,888
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   (669,911)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (669,911)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.56)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.56)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.86
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0



</TABLE>
U.S. BANK, N.A., etc., Appellant, v. LEASE CAPITAL, LLC, Appellee.

No. 3D17-369

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 16, 2018

Weitz & Schwartz, P.A. and Sarah T. Weitz (Fort Lauderdale), for appellant.

Law Offices of Evan M. Rosen, P.A. and Evan M. Rosen (Fort Lauderdale), for appellee.

Before SUAREZ, SCALES and LUCK, JJ.

**ON CONFESSION OF ERROR**

PER CURIAM.

In March 2016, the trial court-correctly, based on our precedent at the time, *1004*Deutsche Bank Tr. Co. Americas v. Beauvais*, No. 3D14-575, 2014 WL 7156961, at *1 (Fla. 3d DCA Dec. 17, 2014), *opinion withdrawn and superseded on reh'g en banc*, 188 So.3d 938 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) -granted summary judgment in favor of Lease Capital, LLC on its statute of limitations affirmative defense. Now that our en banc court decided *Beauvais*, and the Florida Supreme Court ruled as it did in *Bartram v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n*, 211 So.3d 1009 (Fla. 2016), Lease Capital commendably confesses that the trial court's summary judgment must be reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings. We agree, and do so now.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Exhibit 32.1





STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 (the Form 10-Q) of Grayson Bankshares, Inc. (the Company), we, Jacky K. Anderson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Blake M. Edwards, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to our knowledge:



(a)

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



(b)

the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.







By:  /s/ Jacky K. Anderson

Date:  May 16, 2005

Jacky K. Anderson

Chief Executive Officer







By:  /s/ Blake M. Edwards

Date:  May 16, 2005

Blake M. Edwards

Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit32.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Andrew K. Moller, Executive Vice President andChief Financial Officer of Christopher & Banks Corporation (the “Company”)certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.  Thequarterly report of the Company on Form 10-Q****forthe period ended May 31, 2008 as filed with the United States Securities andExchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended;  and

 

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

 

 
| Date: July 10, 2008 |   |
|---------------------|--------|
|                |   |
|                | By:    | /s/ Andrew K. Moller |
|                |   | Andrew K. Moller |
|                |   | *Executive Vice President* |
|                |   | *and Chief Financial Officer* |

 

----
1

Memo 

To: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0799 

From: Joseph McDonald, U.S. EPA-OTAQ-ASD 

CC: Ed Nam, U.S. EPA-OTAQ-ASD 

Date: October 6, 2010 

Re: SAE-AEI article on 2012 Nissan HEV system 

A hard copy of the February 15, 2010 SAE Automotive Engineering International Online article entitled 

“Nissan's new 2012 hybrid system aims for 1.8-L efficiency with a 3.5-L V6” is available within EPA’s 

Docket Center. 

The article has been copyrighted and is not available within the electronic docket. Parties that wish to 

view a hard copy of this document can do so at the at the EPA Docket Center: Air and Radiation 

Docket and Information Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, 

Washington DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-

1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.
Carlos E. REYES, M.D. And Thomas M. McNeil, M.D., Appellants, v. Heather K. LYONS, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1771

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 28, 2018

Erik P. Bartenhagen and Dinah Stein of Hicks, Porter, Ebenfeld & Stein, P.A., Miami; and Ronald H. Josepher of Josepher & Batteese, P.A., Tampa, for Appellants.

Kristin A. Norse and Stuart C. Markman of Kynes, Markman & Felman, P.A., Tampa; and Armando T. Lauritano of Morgan & Morgan, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, KHOUZAM, and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.
#### Lady Bayard, Division of Bayard Shirt Company, Petitioner, *v.*Irving Raymar, Respondent.

Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County,

March 8, 1973.

*Meitner é Rosenfeld*for petitioner. *Irving Raymar,*respondent in person. *Abraham Blume*and *Michael Gitter*for State Tax Commissioner, intervenor.

Burton S. Sherman, J.

Motion No. 56 and cross motion No. 85 are consolidated for the purpose of disposition.

In this supplemental proceeding, the petitioner, a judgment creditor, moves pursuant to CPLR 5225 (subd. [b]) and CPLR 5227 for an order directing a third-party escrow agent to turn over sufficient proceeds to satisfy the judgment from an escrow fund which had been established by a bulk sale of the judgment debtor’s business.

The State Tax Commission cross-moves to intervene pursuant to CPLR 5225 (subd. [b]) and CPLR 5227 and for an order that it has a priority claim upon the escrow fund.

Sufficient reasons having been indicated, that part of the Tax Commission’s cross motion seeking intervention is granted.

As to the question of priority, it appears that five tax warrants were issued against the judgment debtor and the Tax Commission levied on the warrants on August 30, 1972 pursuant to CPLR 5232 (subd. [a]). This is not denied by the escrow agent. The petitioner, on the other hand, entered judgment on November 14,1972 and served a restraining order on the escrow fund on November 16, 1972. Priority among judgment creditors under the CPLR is gained only after a levy, an order directing delivery or the appointment of a receiver of property of the judgment debtor. (CPLR 5234, subds. [b], [c].) The mere entry of a judgment or the service of a restraining order is insufficient to gain such priority. *(City of New York*v. *Panzirer,*23 A D 2d 158.)

*355Moreover subdivision (c) of section 1141 of the Tax Law of the State of New York requires that 10 days’ notice of a bulk sale be given to the State Tax Commission by the prospective purchaser. Failure to give such notice permits the commission to obtain a priority right or lien on the consideration for the bulk sale for any sales taxes due. In this case it is not denied that the purchaser failed to notify the commission of the sale. The notice it did receive was from the seller and was not timely.

Accordingly the State Tax Commission’s cross motion is further granted to the extent of declaring that it has a first priority right and lien against the escrow fund held by Irving Raymar, Esq. and belonging to the judgment debtor which was a part of the consideration for the sale herein over the petitioner and judgment creditor Lady Bayard, Division of Bayard Shirt Company. This determination is not intended to adjudicate the rights of any other creditors. The motion of the petitioner is denied.