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

<ARTICLE>      5
<CIK>     0000064500
<NAME>    SKLAR CORPORATION

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                        JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                  222,302
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                         2,215,358
<ALLOWANCES>                            104,658
<INVENTORY>                           3,142,215
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      5,812,720
<PP&E>                                1,570,950
<DEPRECIATION>                          912,841
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        7,188,808
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 4,251,141
<BONDS>                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                 248
<COMMON>                                149,795
<OTHER-SE>                            2,775,043
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          7,188,808
<SALES>                               3,372,908
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      3,372,908
<CGS>                                 1,812,206
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         3,236,172
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       30,898
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         105,838
<INCOME-TAX>                             12,008
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      93,830
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                             93,830
<EPS-BASIC>                                0.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                              0.02


</TABLE>
#### COM. v. JACKSON, J.

2600 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

08/17/2017

C-51-CR-1202331-2005

(Philadelphia)

Vacated/Remanded
|                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                              
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)      
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                
|View History:                                                 
|                                                              
|New York Natural Gas % of Total Residential - Sales  (Percent)
|                                                              
|                                                              
|New York Natural Gas % of Total Residential - Sales  (Percent)
|                                                              

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 100.0 
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 99.2   | 99.2   | 99.3   | 99.2   | 99.3   | 99.1   | 99.0   | 98.8   | 1.0    | 91.9  
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 88.9   | 87.8   | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0 
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0 
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  | 100.0  |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

July 29, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 135245(50) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 135245 

 COA: 270525 

Macomb CC: 2005-003694-FC 

THOMAS VINCENT MACLEAN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s March 26, 

2008 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously. 

KELLY, J., would grant the motion for reconsideration. 

d0721 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

July 29, 2008 

 Clerk
Record of Ex Parte Contacts

Docket No. FAA
- 2011
- 1319 Directorate Identifier: 2011
- NM - 143
- AD **With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Holder, manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)?**  (You might need to submit a separate record to the Rules Docket. The AD Manual defines “ **Ex Parte Contacts** .”) ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTACTED DATE RESPONSE Boeing Bob Robinson multiple Concur. Boeing Andrew Kulak Multiple Concur. ATA Jo e White 6/27/2011 No response.

Other/Additional Infor mation:
#### Robert MORRIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-2020

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[October 12, 2017]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Michael A. Robinson, Judge; L.T. Case No. 14-14141 CF10A.

*Affirmed.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5



<S>                                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                        9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                    JAN-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                                                         OCT-31-2000
<CASH>                                                                 7,900,581
<SECURITIES>                                                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                         13,275,831
<ALLOWANCES>                                                             257,504
<INVENTORY>                                                           13,782,676
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                      36,685,173
<PP&E>                                                                28,746,263
<DEPRECIATION>                                                        15,620,691
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                        68,701,235
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                 14,144,612
<BONDS>                                                               10,436,120
<COMMON>                                                                 720,235
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                                                            44,554,019
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                          68,701,235
<SALES>                                                               61,767,172
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                      61,767,172
<CGS>                                                                 40,654,436
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                         52,573,589
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                       534,376
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                        9,028,431
<INCOME-TAX>                                                           3,327,649
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                                0
<CHANGES>                                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                                           5,700,782
<EPS-BASIC>                                                                  .92
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                                .92


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-5145

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

YOLANDA RENEE JOHNSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CR04-556)

Submitted: March 10, 2006 Decided: March 30, 2006

Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

C. William Michaels, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J.

Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Martin J. Clarke, Assistant

United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Yolanda Renee Johnson pled guilty to one count of

extortion under color of official right, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 1951 (2000). On appeal, Johnson claims the district court abused

its discretion by imposing a four-level upward adjustment to the

offense level and by failing to fully consider the sentencing

factors under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2005).

Finding no error, we affirm.

We review a sentence for reasonableness which includes

consideration of whether the sentence is within the statutory range

and whether the sentence was guided by the guidelines and

§ 3553(a). United States v. Green, 436 F.3d 449, 456 (4th Cir.

2006). The district court is given “some latitude” to impose a

sentence outside the guidelines. Id. Any such sentence is

reviewed for abuse of discretion. Id. at 457. 

We find the district court properly considered the

sentencing guidelines and articulated appropriate factors as to why

an upward adjustment was warranted. Because the court articulated

its reasoning for imposing a higher sentence and supported its

reasoning using appropriate factors, we find the sentence

reasonable and not an abuse of discretion. See United States v.

Moreland, 437 F.3d 424, 432 (4th Cir. 2006). 

Accordingly, we affirm the conviction and sentence. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
- 3 -

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 88 (Thursday, May 7, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 25208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-12072]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket Nos. RP98-198-000 and RP85-177-126]


Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation; Notice of Stipulation and 
Agreement

May 1, 1998.
    Take notice that on April 28, 1998, pursuant to Rule 602 of the 
Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Commission, 18 CFR 385.602 Texas 
Eastern Transmission Corporation (Texas Eastern) and the Sponsoring 
Parties submit a Joint Stipulation and Agreement Amending Global 
Settlement (offer of Settlement) as a limited amendment to the 
Stipulation and Agreement approved by the Commission in Texas Eastern 
Transmission Corporation, Docket Nos. RP95-177 (Global Settlement).
    Texas Eastern states that the offer of settlement is designed as a 
limited modification of the Global Settlement in response to concerns 
of Texas Eastern and Texas Eastern's customers relating to 
restructuring a the local level and the increased competitive 
environment in the marketplace. Texas Eastern also states that the 
offer of settlement is also designed to reduce and, thus, render more 
competitive Texas Eastern's rates in the near future, to the benefit of 
Texas Eastern, its customers and consumers.
    Texas Eastern states that copies of the filing are being served 
contemporaneously on all participants listed on the service list in 
this proceeding.
    Pursuant to Rule 602, Initial Comments must be filed on or before 
May 18, 1998 and Reply Comments will be due on May 28, 1998.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or 
before May 18, 1998. Persons who are already a party to the Docket No. 
RP85-177-000, et al., proceeding, do not have to file a motion to 
intervene. Protests 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. Any person wishing to become a 
party must file a motion to intervene. 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. 98-12072 Filed 5-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
113P17

#### State v. Linzie Lee Swink

1. Defs Notice of Appeal Based Upon a Constitutional Question (COA16-89)

2. Defs PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

3. State’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal

i.-

2. Denied

3. 'Allowed
243P16

#### State v. Jimmy Lee Gann

1. State’s Motion for Temporary Stay (COA15-1344)

2. State’s Petition for *Writ of Supersedeas*

3. State’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

4. Def’s Conditional PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

1. Allowed 06/27/2016 Dissolved 03/16/2017

2. Dismissed as moot

3. Special Order

4. Dismissed as moot
# C_2019431EN.01000701.xml

| 23.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 431/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 431/7

---

Withdrawal of notification of a concentration

(Case M.9643 — ENGIE/Versicherungskammer/Portfolio Companies)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 431/07)

Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004

On 20 November 2019, the European Commission received notification (1) of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (‘Merger Regulation’).

On 18 December 2019, the notifying parties informed the Commission that they withdrew their notification.

---

(1)  Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No C 405, 2.12.2019, p. 15.

---
----

| (1) | 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. Section 78m(a) or                  Section                  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. |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated:  February                12, 2008 |   | /s/                Gary J. Morgan      |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------|
|                                               |   | Gary                J. Morgan          |
|                                               |   | Chief                Financial Officer |

----
**Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to**

**18 U.S.C. Section1350**

**as AdoptedPursuant to**

**Section 906 of theSarbanes Oxley Act of 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Rock ofAges Corporation (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2008as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), Donald M. Labonte, as Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best ofhis knowledge:

 

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

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

 

/s/ Donald M. Labonte

Name:   Donald M. Labonte

Title:    Chief Executive Officer

Date:     March31, 2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

----
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas April 5, 2021 No. 04-20-00326-CR Leonard CHARGUALAF , Appellant
v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 16-1243-CR-A Honorable William D. Old III, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R In this Anders case, Appellant requests more time to prepare his response due to multiple prison transfers. Appellant’s motion is GRANTED. Appellant’s pro se response is due on April 30, 2021.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 5th day of April, 2021.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
EPA Reg. No. 70144-1 

Vol. 2
```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 83 (Thursday, April 30, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 23796]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-11500]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

Importation of Controlled Substances Notice of Application

    Pursuant to Section 1008 of the Controlled Substances Import and 
Export Act (21 U.S.C. 958(i)), the Attorney General shall, prior to 
issuing a registration under this Section to a bulk manufacturer of a 
controlled substance in Schedule I or II and prior to issuing a 
regulation under Section 1002(a) authorizing the importation of such a 
substance, provide manufacturers holding registrations for the bulk 
manufacture of the substance an opportunity for a hearing.
    Therefore, in accordance with Section 1301.34 of Title 21, Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR), notice is hereby given that on January 2, 
1998, Johnson Matthey, Inc., Pharmaceutical Materials, 2003 Nolte 
Drive, West Deptford, New Jersey 08066, made application to the Drug 
Enforcement Administration to be registered as an importer of 
phenylacetone (8501) a basic class of controlled substance listed in 
Schedule II.
    The phenylacetone will be imported for conversion to amphetamine 
base, isomers and salts thereof for sale in bulk form to customers.
    Any manufacturer holding, or applying for, registration as a bulk 
manufacturer of this basic class of controlled substance may file 
written comments on or objections to the application described above 
and may, at the same time, file a written request for a hearing on such 
application in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.43 in such form as 
prescribed by 21 CFR 1316.47.
    Any such comments, objections or requests for a hearing may be 
addressed, in quintuplicate, to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, 
Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, United 
States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. 20537, Attention: DEA 
Federal Register Representative (CCR), and must be filed no later than 
June 1, 1998.
    This procedure is to be conducted simultaneously with and 
independent of the procedures described in 21 CFR 1301.34(b), (c), (d), 
(e), and (f). As noted in a previous notice at 40 FR 43745-46 
(September 23, 1975), all applicants for registration to import basic 
class of any controlled substance in Schedule I or II are and will 
continue to be required to demonstrate to the Deputy Assistant 
Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement 
Administration that the requirements for such registration pursuant to 
21 U.S.C. 958(a), 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and 21 CFR 1301.34(a), (b), (c), 
(d), (e), and (f) are satisfied.

John H. King,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
    Dated: April 17, 1998.
[FR Doc. 98-11500 Filed 4-29-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
```
Exhibit 99.2

                                  [CHASE LOGO]

                         ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

Pursuant to the servicing agreement, the undersigned Officer, to the best of
his/her knowledge, hereby certifies to the following:

I have reviewed the activities and performance of the Servicer and, during the
preceding fiscal year under the terms of the Servicing Agreement, Trust
Agreement, Pooling and Servicing Agreement and/or Seller/Servicer Guide and to
the best of the Officer's knowledge, the Servicer has fulfilled all its duties,
responsibilities or obligations under these Agreements throughout such year.

      a)    All property inspections have been completed.

      b)    Compliance relative to Adjustable Rate Mortgages has been met.

      c)    Compliance with IRS Foreclosure reporting regulations enacted as IRS
            Section 6060J by the Deficit Reduction Act, regarding Acquired
            and/or Abandonment property have been completed.

      d)    All loans serviced in states that have statutes requiring payment of
            interest on escrow/impound accounts have been completed.

      e)    That such Officer has confirmed that the Fidelity Bond, the Errors
            and Omissions Insurance Policy and any other bonds required under
            the terms of the Servicing Agreement are in full force and effect.

      f)    Enclosed is a copy of our most recent independent audit statement.


CERTIFIED BY: /s/ Kim Greaves                            Date: March 13, 2006
              --------------------------                       ----------------
               Kim Greaves
               Senior Vice President
               Chase Home Finance LLC


              /s/ Jim Miller                             Date: March 13, 2006
              --------------------------                       ----------------
               Jim Miller
               Senior Vice President
               Chase Home Finance LLC


<PAGE>

SEE EXHIBIT 99.1 FOR MOST RECENT INDEPENDENT AUDIT STATEMENT
No. 12-6836.

#### Cummins *v.*City of Yuma, Arizona, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*denied, and certiorari dismissed. See this Court’s Rule 39.8.