alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.1**
I, Dan W. Gladney, Chief Executive Officer of Compex Technologies, Inc., certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Compex Technologies, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this quarterly report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included inthis quarterly report fairly present, in all material respects, the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of Compex Technologies, Inc. as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))for the registrant and have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterlyreport is being prepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and
c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of tan annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, andreport financial information; and  b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the internal controls of the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: February 9, 2005        /s/ Dan W. Gladney           Signature     Name: Dan W. Gladney     Title: Chief Executive Officer    
24
|                                                                                       
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                       
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                               
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                         
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                         
|View History:                                                                          
|                                                                                       
|Price of Liquefied U.S. Natural Gas Exports to Russia (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                       
|                                                                                       
|Price of Liquefied U.S. Natural Gas Exports to Russia (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                       

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 12.12  | --     | --    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     |        | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE BODY OF THE FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-27-1997
<CASH>                                           3,024
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   25,179
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,402)
<INVENTORY>                                      7,590
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,606
<PP&E>                                          26,638
<DEPRECIATION>                                (13,646)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  84,433
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           28,966
<BONDS>                                         17,099
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           885
<OTHER-SE>                                      36,285
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    84,433
<SALES>                                         57,373
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                57,373
<CGS>                                           35,594
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   66,530
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (278)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 830
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,709)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,716)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,993)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,993)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.10)
        

</TABLE>
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Tex as

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 20

- 0004 9

- CR

O TIS D ON T ROTTER

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 372nd District

Court

of Tarran t County ( 1546894D )

September 30, 2021

Memorandum Opinion by Justice

Birdwell

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the tr ial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the tr ial

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Wade Birdwell

Justice Wade Birdwell
#### In the Matter of Ursula O’Marah, Petitioner, *v.*Arthur Levitt, as State Comptroller, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Albany County,

February 25, 1972.

*885
      *Ingrám & Ingram*for petitioner. *Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (John Q. Driscoll*of counsel), for respondent.

DeForest C. Pitt, J.

By this article 78 proceeding the petitioner seeks a judgment directing the respondent, Arthur Levitt, State Comptroller, to accept her application for accidental disability retirement benefits under section 63 of the Retirement and Social Security Law. The application was disapproved by the respondent for the reason that he felt it was not timely filed. In issue is paragraph 3 of subdivision a of section 63 of the Retirement and Social Security Law, which in part requires that the subject application be filed, *11*not later than two years after the member is first discontinued from service ”.

It appears that the petitioner was disabled to perform her duties as a laundress in the .St. Lawrence State Hospital by reason of injuries sustained in an accident which occurred in the performance of her duties on April 17, 1967. After the exhaustion of her accrued leave credits the petitioner was granted leave without pay commencing August 31, 1967, which leave of absence expired October 18, 1968. The respondent, interpreting the above-noted statute, has ruled that the petitioner’s application was barred for the reason that it was not filed within two years of August 31, 1967, the date the petitioner was granted leave without pay. The petitioner urges that the two-year period should be computed from October 18,1968, the date her leave of absence expired.

The court is persuaded to the conclusion that the respondent has erred in his interpretation of the noted statute. The Legislature has by many sections of the Civil Service Law indicated that in other instances leaves of absence are not to be considered as interruptions of continuous service. (See § 130, subd. 3, par. [e]; § 52, subd. 3; § 80, subd. 2.) The respondent’s determination in this instance then appears to produce an inconsistent result. Moreover, the interpretation of the respondent would require the petitioner to reach a decision as to premature retirement notwithstanding the fact that she could request re-employment upon finding her disability not to be permanent. The petitioner, in short, under the respondent’s determination enjoyed a continuous service status for one purpose, but not for another. Such reasoning cannot be sustained.

Accordingly, petitioner may submit judgment for the relief prayed for.
H. Con. Res. 81 Agreed to September 26, 2011

One Hundred Twelfth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the fifth day of January, two thousand and eleven 

Concurrent Resolution 

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That, in the enrollment of the bill (H.R. 2608) to provide 

for an additional temporary extension of programs under the Small 

Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, 

and for other purposes, the Clerk of the House of Representatives 

shall make the following correction: 

Amend the title so as to read: ‘‘An Act making continuing 

appropriations for fiscal year 2012, and for other purposes.’’. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate.
From: Lynn Placek [ mailto:LPlacek@cityofalliance.net ]

Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 11:52 AM

To: Muldoon, Albert (OST)

Cc: J.D. Cox; 'Wayne Anderson'; 'Michael Mooney' Subject: Great Lakes Notice of Termination

Mr. Muldoon,

Alliance and Chadron would like to offer comments to DOT regarding Great Lakes request to exit our markets on 90 day notice. This news did come as a surprise to AIA and CDR because Great Lakes assured us only weeks ago that they would stay until relieved. We have also seen reports that show in May we will be down to one flight a day again and that in June we will have zero flights s cheduled and July is showing no trips selling. Do they not have to get approval from the Department to move

forward with the notice? Alliance and Chadron has went over a year with Great Lakes fulfilling half the flights contracted and I believe it is not too much to ask that Great Lakes at least provide one flight a day until relieved by Boutique Air.

First, we feel it is very important that the DOT not grant Great Lakes permission to leave until the DOT has issued the order granting Boutique the new EAS contract. To allow the incumbent carrier to exit, after that carrier promised to stay until relieved, and before the order granting the new carrier leaves AIA and CDR in a very precarious situation. While Boutique can assume they will be awarded, they cannot fully make the commitments to enable a prompt market entry until the DOT order is issued.

Furthermore, we wish to make note of the TSA secure flight status for Boutique. Boutique Air must obtain TSA secure flight status prior to beginning Alliance /Chadron service. They are seeking this status, not just for our cities, but also for Show Low service in Arizona. Our choice of Boutique was based on assurance that TSA secure flight status would be obtained and while we have no reason to

think it will not be obtained, it is essential to the successful operation of our new air service. While the Department has no control over Boutique’s efforts to obtain the needed TSA status, we just make note that again, for that reason, we ask the Department to restr ain Great Lakes from exiting our market until we have a clear path to our new airline.

It is not our intention to seek to hold Great Lakes in for an extended period. However, we kindly request that Great Lakes remain until relieved, as is the tradition f or EAS carriers nationwide.

We are available to discuss this if the Department deems necessary.

Thank you for any and all consideration.

Lynn



### Lynn M. Placek, Airport Manager Alliance Municipal Airport 5631 Sarpy Road; P.O. Box D Alliance, NE 69301 ( 308) 762

- 4512 (308) 762

- 2568 (Fax)

### www.FlyAllianceNE.com

Confidentiality Notice | This e

- mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential or proprietary information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, immediately contact the sender by reply e

- mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
# C_2019414EN.01001201.xml

| 10.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 414/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 414/12

---

Notice for the attention of the data subjects to whom the restrictive measures provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo apply

(2019/C 414/06)

The attention of data subjects is drawn to the following information in accordance with Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1):

The legal basis for this processing operation is Council Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 (2).

The controller of this processing operation is the Council of the European Union represented by the Director-General of RELEX (Foreign Affairs, Enlargement, Civil Protection) of the General Secretariat of the Council and the department entrusted with the processing operation is RELEX.1.C that can be contacted at:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| RELEX.1.C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

RELEX.1.C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

The purpose of the processing operation is the establishment and updating of the list of persons subject to restrictive measures in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005.

The data subjects are the natural persons who fulfil listing criteria as laid down in that Regulation.

The personal data collected includes data necessary for the correct identification of the person concerned, the Statement of Reasons and any other data related thereto.

The personal data collected may be shared as necessary with the European External Action Service and the Commission.

Without prejudice to restrictions provided for in Article 20(1)(a) and (d) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, requests for access, as well as requests for rectification or objection will be answered in accordance with Section 5 of Council Decision 2004/644/EC (3).

Personal data will be retained for 5 years from the moment the data subject has been removed from the list of persons subject to the asset freeze or the validity of the measure has expired, or for the duration of court proceedings in the event they had been started.

Data subjects may have recourse to the European Data Protection Supervisor in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

---

(1)  OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 193, 23.7.2005, p. 1.

(3)  OJ L 296, 21.9.2004, p. 16.

---
#### Evan SHORT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2996

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed December 29, 2017

Evan Short, Sneads, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Carmen F. Corrente, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. . ,

*526PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Evan Short, appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. In his motion, Short alleged that his trial counsel was ineffective because 1) counsel failed to request a Richardson1 hearing and 2) counsel failed to properly advise Short of the possibility and consequences of being sentenced as a habitual felony offender. We affirm as to the first claim without further discussion. Regarding the second claim, the trial court held that the allegations were facially insufficient because Short failed to allege each element provided in Alcorn v. State, 121 So.3d 419, 422 (Fla. 2013). Although the trial court was correct in concluding that the claim was facially insufficient, Short should have been provided sixty days to amend his motion to state a facially sufficient claim, if he can do so in good faith. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(3); see, e.g., Campbell v. State, 139 So.3d 490, 495 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). We therefore reverse the summary denial of the second claim and remand for further proceedings.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.

SAWAYA, PALMER, and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

1

. Richardson v. State, 246 So.2d 771 (Fla. 1971).
|                                                                     
|---------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                     
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)             
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                       
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                       
|View History:                                                        
|                                                                     
|Babb, MT Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to Canada  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                     
|                                                                     
|Babb, MT Natural Gas Pipeline Exports to 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                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 91     |        | NA     | NA    
|2000's                                                                                                                            | NA     | 549    | 143    | 38     | 1,429  | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 20     | 0      | 0      | 122    | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      |       
|- = 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
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Joseph O. Evans, Chief Financial Officer of Chaparral Energy Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of my knowledge:



|(1) | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13
(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                     |  |                                        
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------
|Date: April 14, 2010 |  | /s/ JOSEPH O. EVANS                    
|                     |  | Joseph O. Evans
Chief Financial Officer

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.