alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                             
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                             
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                     
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                               
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                               
|View History:                                                                
|                                                                             
|Waddington, NY Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                             
|                                                                             
|Waddington, NY Natural Gas Pipeline Imports From Canada  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                             

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0  | Year-1  | Year-2  | Year-3  | Year-4  | Year-5  | Year-6  | Year-7  | Year-8  | Year-9 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | ------- | -------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |         |         |         |         |         |         | 288,807 | 295,568 | 293,234 | 324,400
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 337,989 | 290,981 | 285,188 | 296,989 | 331,234 | 349,230 | 406,033 | 422,315 | 395,758 | 349,980
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 267,227 | 231,831 | 241,506 | 214,671 | 187,219 | 175,194 | 197,095 | 137,903 | 175,494 | 157,781
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 147,557 | 166,716 | 180,254 | 133,842 |         |         |         |         |         |        
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
January 30, 2014



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

JERRY ROQUEMORE , Appellant

NO. 14

- 13

- 01127

- CV V.

STATE FARM LLOYDS , Appellee

________________________________ Today the Court heard appellant ’ s motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment signed by the court below on September 16, 2013. Having considered the motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

. We further order that each party shall pay its costs by reason of this appeal. We further order that mandate be issued immediately.
We further order this decision certified below for observance.
#### COM. v. LOWRY, D.

1338 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

07/25/2017

CP-23-CR-0007108-2014 (Delaware)

Affirmed
Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust Inc.
Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-WMC1

Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest
Distributions to Certificateholders for 2006


Class      Interest            Principal            Realized           Ending
          Distribution            Paid               Losses            Balance

A1       11,166,704.03       99,943,348.60           0.00       173,953,651.40
A2A       8,630,688.83      155,369,760.22           0.00       100,866,239.78
A2B       4,656,514.76                0.00           0.00        97,003,000.00
A2C       3,878,605.94                0.00           0.00        80,036,000.00
A2D       3,062,541.75                0.00           0.00        61,912,000.00
CE       12,398,684.56              176.35           0.00        19,153,440.48
M1        1,827,586.28                0.00           0.00        36,342,000.00
M10         694,992.84                0.00           0.00         8,840,000.00
M11         772,275.41                0.00           0.00         9,823,000.00
M2        1,682,488.27                0.00           0.00        33,396,000.00
M3        1,167,088.50                0.00           0.00        23,082,000.00
M4          835,762.39                0.00           0.00        16,207,000.00
M5          840,205.80                0.00           0.00        16,207,000.00
M6          777,254.81                0.00           0.00        14,733,000.00
M7          820,334.28                0.00           0.00        14,242,000.00
M8          659,999.78                0.00           0.00        10,313,000.00
M9          750,733.69                0.00           0.00        10,805,000.00
P         2,826,553.87                0.00           0.00               100.00
R                 0.00                0.00           0.00                 0.00
RX                0.00                0.00           0.00                 0.00
|                                                                                    
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                    
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                
|View History: Annual                                                                
|View History:                                                                       
|                                                                                    
|District of Columbia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                    
|                                                                                    
|District of Columbia Natural Gas Pipeline and Distribution Use  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                    

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 246    | 256    | 244   
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 243    | 236    | 242    | 470    | 466    | 487    | 464    | 238    | 203    | 177   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 213    | 1,703  | 1,068  | 1,434  | 1,305  | 817    | 901    | 1,126  | 1,317  | 1,898 
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 561    | 902    | 1,518  |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024
REVIEW
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





To the
Board of Directors and Stockholders of


Sensivida
Medical Technologies, Inc.





We have
reviewed the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet of Sensivida
Medical Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of August 31,
2009, and the related condensed consolidated statements of operations for the
three-month and six-month periods ended August 31, 2009 and 2008, and cash flows
for the six-month periods then ended. These interim condensed consolidated
financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s
management.





We
conducted our reviews in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A review of interim financial
information consists principally of applying analytical procedures and making
inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is
substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with standards
of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the objective
of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements
taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.





Based on
our reviews, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made
to the accompanying interim condensed consolidated financial statements referred
to above for them to be in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America.





The
accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared
assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern.  As
disclosed in Note 1 to the condensed consolidated financial statements, the
Company has no revenues, incurred significant losses from operations, and has
negative working capital and an accumulated deficit which raises substantial
doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.  Management’s
plan in regard to these matters is also described
in        Note 1.  The
condensed consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments
relating to the recoverability and classification of asset carrying amounts or
the amount and classification of liabilities that might result should the
Company be unable to continue as a going concern.





We have
previously audited, in accordance with auditing standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet of
Sensivida Medical Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries as of February 28, 2009,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders’
deficit, and cash flows for the year then ended (not presented herein); and in
our report dated June 16, 2010, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those
consolidated financial statements. In our opinion, the information set forth in
the accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of February 28, 2009, is fairly
stated, in all material respects, in relation to the consolidated balance sheet
from which it has been derived.





/s/
Morison Cogen LLP





Bala
Cynwyd, Pennsylvania


June 16,
2010
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 77 (Wednesday, April 22, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19910-19911]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-10617]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket Nos. RP96-312-010 and GT98-19-001]


Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

April 16, 1998.
    Take notice that on April 8, 1998, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company 
(Tennessee), tendered for filing (1) a fully executed firm Gas 
Transportation Agreement between Tennessee and Distrigas of 
Massachusetts, Inc. (the DOMAC Service Agreement) and (2) Substitute 
Sixth Revised Sheet No. 412 to Tennessee's FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth 
Revised Volume No. 1.
    Tennessee states that the DOMAC Service Agreement and the revised 
tariff sheet are filed in compliance with the Commission's March 13, 
1998 letter order (March 13 Order) in the above-referenced docket. In 
accordance with the March 13 Order, Tennessee requests that the tariff 
sheet be deemed effective on April 1, 1998.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests

[[Page 19911]]

will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission 
and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-10617 Filed 4-21-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 78 (Thursday, April 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 20173]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-10828]



[[Page 20173]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defense Information Systems Agency


Membership of the Defense Information System Agency Senior 
Executive Service (SES) Performance Review Board (PRB)

AGENCY: Defense Information System Agency, DOD.

ACTION: Notice of Membership of the Defense Information Systems Agency 
Performance Review Board.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the appointment of the members of the 
Performance Review Board of the Defense Information Systems Agency. The 
publication of membership is required by 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4).
    The Performance Review Board provides fair and impartial review of 
Senior Executive Service performance appraisals and makes 
recommendations regarding performance ratings and performance awards to 
the Director, DISA.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 30 April 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carrie K. Bazemore, SES Program 
Manager, Civilian Personnel Division, Personnel and Administration 
Directorate, Defense Information Systems Agency (703) 607-4411.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4), the 
following are names and titles of the executives who have been 
appointed to serve as members of the DISA SES Performance Review Board. 
They will serve a one-year renewable term, effective 30 April 1998.

Ms. Diann L. McCoy, Deputy Director for C4 and Intelligence Program 
Integration
Mr. Peter Paulson, Chief, Networks Division
John W. Meincke, Brigadier General, USAF, Vice Director, DISA
Jack Penkoske,
Chief, Civilian Personnel Division.
[FR Doc. 98-10828 Filed 4-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3610-05-M
| Date:       May      12, 2009 |           By: | /S/      CHARLES E. HURWITZ                         |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                                                             |                              | Charles      E. HurwitzChief      Executive Officer |

| Date:       May      12, 2009 |           By: | /S/      M. EMILY MADISON                         |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------|
|                                                             |                              | M.      Emily MadisonChief      Financial Officer |
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahr a Bridget M. McCormac k
David F. Viviano
Richard H. Bernstei n Kurtis T. Wilde r Elizabeth T. Clement,
J ustices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at t he direction of the Court.

May 1, 2018

d0423 

# Order

Clerk May 1, 2018

155958

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 155 958 COA: 335992 Alpena CC: 09-002662-FC THOMAS RICHARD LIGHT, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the app lication for leave to appeal the May 12, 2017 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, becaus e the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

W ILDER , J., did not participate becaus e he was on the Court of Appeal s panel.
#### Victor ISME, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-1281

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

September 28, 2017

• Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach *375County; Laura S. Johnson, Judge; L.T. Case No. 14CF013212AMB.

Affirmed.
031P17

#### State v. Jarvis Montrale Bell

Def’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA16-326)

Denied
April 6, 2016 

A~ 

DAR fl NG 

CiEOMATICS 

SUBMITTED ELECTRONICALLY VIA REGULATIONS.GOV 

John S. Duncan 

Director, Flight Standard Service 

800 Independence Ave, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

www .regulations.gov 

RE: Petition to Amend FAA 333 Exemption No.11266 (Regulatory Docket No. 

FAA-2014-0733) to add Pulse Aerospace Vapor 35 

Darling Geomatics has been issued an FAA 333 Exemption, Regulatory Docket No FAA-2014-

0733 (Exemption Number 11266) (hereinafter the Exemption) for the purpose of (])mapping and 

surveying for Federal and Local Flood Control, Federal, State, and Local Disaster Management, 

Landfills, Mining, Utilities, Agriculture, Golf Courses and Construction Sites; (2) operation over 

and/or in non-restricted National Parks, National Forests, and non-navigable airspace using 

nonintrusive recording devices; and (3) operation in otherwise unrestricted U.S. States and 

Territories. Darling Geomatics hereby respectfully petitions for an amendment to the exemption to 

allow an additional type of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) that fully complies with the conditions 

of the original Exemption. 

Darling Geomatics is petitioning the FAA to amend our FAA 333 exemption (11266) to add the 

Pulse Aerospace Vapor 35 under the same terms and conditions contained in our existing 

Exemption. Sent electronically via www.regulations.gov and via US mail with this petition for 

amendment is the Flight Operations and Procedures Manual (FOPM) for the additional UAS. All 

operations of the additional UAS will be in full compliance with the terms of our existing 

Exemption. 

The Pulse Aerospace Vapor 35 airworthiness has already been demonstrated for different projects 

in the United States by a variety of state/federal agencies or universities and private companies who 

coordinated with the FAA to obtain all authorizations required to operate this VAS within the 

United States. 

Darling Geomatics submits that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 11266 remains 

valid and is in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(0, 

University of Arizon11 Science 11nd Technology Park I 9040 South Rilll Road, Ste #2350 I Tucson, AZ 85747 
Petition to Amend FAA 333 Exemption No. 11266 (Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0733) to 

add Pulse Aerospace Vapor 35 

40113, and 44701, Darling Geomatics requests they be granted the amendment to add this Pulse 

Aerospace Vapor 35 UAS to their original exemption. 

As this is an amendment to an existing FAA 333 Exemption asking only for the addition of another 

type of unmanned aerial vehicle, Darling Geomatics respectfully submits that good cause exists so 

that notice does not need to be published in the Federal Register for the requested amendment. 

Please feel free to contact the undersigned should you have any question or concerns concerning 

this petition for an amendment to Darling Geomatics original Exemption #11266. 

Sincerely, 

Darling Geomatics 

~mRichard D. Darling, RLS ~ President 

Attachment: Pulse Aerospace Vapor 35 Operating Manual 

D- A-R

•~ > ING 

CiEDMI\TICS 

Page2of2
EXHIBIT 32.2





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 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A-1 for fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 of Uranium 308 Corp., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Annual Report”), I, Dennis Tan, President, CEO, and a director 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 Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: March 11, 2011
/s/ Dennis TanDennis Tan, President and CEO (Principal

Financial Officer)
|                                                                    
|--------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                    
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                      
|View History: Annual                                                
|View History: Annual                                                
|View History:                                                       
|                                                                    
|Connecticut Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries  (Percent)
|                                                                    
|                                                                    
|Connecticut Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries  (Percent)
|                                                                    

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        | 0.85   | 0.86   | 0.84   | 0.84   | 0.81   | 0.78   | 0.81  
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 0.83   | 0.86   | 0.82   | 0.90   | 0.91   | 0.92   | 0.89   | 0.92   | 0.88   | 0.92  
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0.89   | 0.95   | 0.99   | 0.96   | 1.01   | 1.11   | 1.06   | 1.10   | 1.06   | 1.04  
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 1.04   | 1.06   | 1.02   |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024