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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNAUDITED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 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-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                              58
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      250
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           6,783
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,588
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,878
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                          5,421
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,281
<OTHER-SE>                                     (8,606)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,878
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,728
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,041
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 283
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (596)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (596)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    116
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (480)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.15)


</TABLE>
#### IN the INTEREST OF: N.J.W., a Minor

3752 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

08/18/2017

CP-45-JV-0000192-2016

(Monroe)

Affirmed
|                                                                          
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                          
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                  
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                            
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                            
|View History:                                                             
|                                                                          
|No chart available.                                                       
|No chart available.                                                       
|                                                                          
|                                                                          
|Illinois Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals from Shale Gas (Million 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                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1966

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the joint ownership

of individual retirement accounts.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 24 (legislative day, FEBRUARY 22), 1994

Mr. WOFFORD introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the

joint ownership of individual retirement accounts.

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

3 SECTION 1. JOINT OWNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUAL RETIRE4 MENT ACCOUNTS.

5 Section 219(g) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986

6 (relating to community property laws) is amended to read

7 as follows:

8 ‘‘(g) COMMUNITY PROPERTY LAWS; JOINT SPOUSAL

9 OWNERSHIP.—
2

•S 1966 IS

1 ‘‘(1) COMMUNITY PROPERTY LAWS.—This sec2 tion shall be applied without regard to any commu3 nity property laws.

4 ‘‘(2) JOINT OWNERSHIP.—If an individual re5 tirement account or annuity is held jointly by a hus6 band and wife under State law—

7 ‘‘(A) the account or annuity shall not be

8 treated as failing to meet the exclusive benefit

9 requirement of subsection (a) or (b) solely by

10 reason of the joint ownership, but

11 ‘‘(B) this section shall be applied without

12 regard to the joint ownership.

13 This paragraph shall apply only if the individual on

14 whose behalf the account is established is designated

15 under the written governing instrument.’’.

Æ
2017-0573.

#### State ex rel. Dilly v. Martin.

In Prohibition. Pursuant to R.C. 2710.06(B)(1), the court has been notified that the parties have reached a settlement. This case is returned to the regular docket under S.Ct.Prae.R. 19.01. Within 60 days, the filing party shall file either an application for dismissal or a notice of failure of settlement. The case will be dismissed for want of prosecution if an application for dismissal or a notice of failure of settlement is not filed within 60 days.
# Distribution Aide-de-Camp promoted to Captain

/ Published May 28, 2019
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
On May 14, surrounded by his wife and colleagues, Army 1st Lt. Tyler Hultgren, DLA Distribution aide-de-camp, was promoted to the rank of captain.

The ceremony was officiated by Distribution Commanding Officer Navy Rear. Adm. Kevin M. Jones.

“The Army doesn’t promote for the sake of promoting,” Jones explained. “They see the caliber of officer you are and will continue to be in the future.”

Jones went on to say, “This position of aide-de-camp is a stepping stone.  Your experience here at DLA Distribution is setting the foundation for your continued service to the United States Army. Everything you have experienced is building that foundation to success. Take that knowledge and apply it in everything you do going forward in your career.”

Following a reading of the official order announcing Hultgren’s promotion, he was pinned to the rank of captain by his wife, Natalie.

“I have invited each of you to be here with me today because I believe all of you have helped to mentor and shape me over my past year at DLA Distribution,” said Hultgren. “Thank you for everything.”

Hultgren grew up in St. Cloud, Minnesota, and was a 2015 graduate from Wheaton College, Illinois, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in business/economics and received his commission through Army ROTC into the Ordnance Corps.

After commissioning, he served as the Gold Bar recruiter for his alma mater, helping recruit future cadets for the upcoming academic year. He was then stationed at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, in the 3rd Brigade Combat Team (BCT) (RAKASANS), 101st Airborne Division. His assignments while in 3 BCT include:  Maintenance Control Officer and Executive Office for Juliet Company, 2-506 Infantry Battalion (CURRAHEE) and Operations Officer for Alpha Company, 626 Brigade Support Battalion (BSB) (ASSURGAM).

Additionally, Hultgren completed Air Assault School while stationed at Fort Campbell and was awarded the German Armed Forces Badge (Gold) while attending Basic Officer Leadership Course at Fort Lee, Virginia.
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, J. David Smith, Chairman and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of Euramax International, Inc., certify that:

1.                I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 10-K of Euramax International, Inc.;

2.                Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.                Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.                The registrant’sother certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

a)                designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)               evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

c)                disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the period covered by this report that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.                The registrant’sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

a)                all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

b)               anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.
| Date: March 31, 2005 | By:    | /s/ J. DAVID SMITH                                |
|---------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------|
|                           | Title: | *Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President* |

 

----
Exhibit 10.13

 

MOCON, INC.

 

DESCRIPTION OF NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR
 COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS

 

Retainer and Meeting Fees.    Each of the non-employee directors of MOCON, Inc. receives an annual retainer fee of $10,000, paid in equal quarterly installments, without regard to the number of board of directors or committee meetings held or attended by such director, along with an additional $500 for each board meeting or committee meeting attended in person or via telephone. The Chairman of the Audit Committee receives an additional annual retainer fee of $3,000, paid in equal quarterly installments.

 

Stock Options.    Non-employee directors are granted options to purchase shares of MOCON common stock from time to time in the sole discretion of the board of directors.

 

Director Retirement Plan.    Pursuant to the MOCON, Inc. Director Retirement Plan, a non-employee director who has served on the board of directors of MOCON for at least five years will, upon retirement, receive an amount equal to the annual retainer fee such director would have been entitled to receive during the fiscal year in which such director’s retirement occurs. This payment, however, will not be made to a director who, following his or her retirement, continues to serve as a consultant to MOCON or any of its subsidiaries. Any amount payable under this retirement plan will be paid as determined by the MOCON board of directors in its sole discretion following such director’s retirement.

 

Reimbursement of Expenses.    Non-employee directors are reimbursed for actual expenses incurred in attending board and committee meetings.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Renzzo Rodriguez, Appellant.

[767 NYS2d 820]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Calabrese, J.), rendered May 4, 2001, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The law is well settled that the nature and extent of cross examination are matters within the trial court’s sound discretion *(see People v Hudy,*73 NY2d 40, 56 [1988]; *People v McGriff,*201 AD2d 672, 673 [1994]). Here, the trial court providently exercised its discretion in permitting the prosecutor to cross-examine the defendant’s girlfriend about the removal of the girlfriend’s children from her custody by the Nassau County child protective services agency due to physical abuse *(see People v Ayala,*280 AD2d 552 [2001]; *People v English,*126 AD2d 738 [1987]; *People v Batista,*113 AD2d 890 [1985]).

The defendant’s arguments regarding alleged prosecutorial misconduct during summation are largely unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Hirsch,*299 AD2d 559 [2002]; *People v Mejias,*296 AD2d 583, 584 [2002]). In any *465event, the challenged remarks constituted fair comment on the evidence *(see People v Ashwal,*39 NY2d 105 [1976]), were responsive to arguments presented in the defense counsel’s summation *(see People v Galloway,*54 NY2d 396 [1981]), or were harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt *(see People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230 [1975]). Santucci, J.P., McGinity, Schmidt and Adams, JJ., concur.
#### Com. v. Muhammad26

12/31/2015

280 EAL (2015)

26

. Justice EAKIN did not participate in the decision of this matter.

Denied

Pa.Super., 121 A.3d 1136
Dismissed; Opinion issued January 15, 2013 

In The 

Qtourt of l\ppenl.s 

ltifth. 1Bi.strid of wexa.s at 1llnlln.s 

No. 05-12-00819-CV 

JULIUS HOLMES, ANTONIO SPENCE~ AND ALL OCCUPANTS OF 

3320 PECAN SHADOW WAY, DALLAS, TEXAS, Appellants 

v. 

DEUTSCH BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE FOR 

AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC., ASSET-BACKED 

PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-R2, Appellee 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-11-08781-D 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Francis and Lang-Miers 

On November 6, 2012, appellee moved to dismiss this appeal as moot. On November 20, 

2012, the Court directed appellant to file a response to the motion to dismiss within ten days. To 

date, appellant has not filed a response or otherwise communicated with the Court regarding this 

appeal. Accordingly, we GRANT the motion and DISMISS this appeal. 

PER CURIAM 

120819F .P05 
Qrourt of 1\.pp.eals 

lJrtft}J 1llistri.ct of ID.exa.s at 1llalla.s 

JUDGMENT 

JULIUS HOLMES, ANTONIO SPENCER, 

AND ALL OCCUPANTS OF 3320 PECAN 

SHADOW WAY, DALLAS, TEXAS, 

Appellants 

No. 05-12-00819-CV V. 

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST 

COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE FOR 

AMERJQUEST MORTGAGE 

SECURITIES INC., ASSET-BACKED 

PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, 

SERIES 2005-R2, Appellee 

Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4 

of Dallas County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. CC-11-

08781-D). 

Opinion delivered per curiam before Chief 

Justice Wright and Justices Francis and 

Lang-Miers. 

Based on the Court's opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. Appellee is 

ORDERED to recover its costs of this appeal from appellants. 

Judgment entered ___ J_a_n_u_a_r_Y_15_• _2

_0_1

_

3 

______ _
2016-1650.

#### State v. Sands.

Lake App. No. 2015-L-134, 2016-Ohio-7150.
#### In the Matter of Henry Harrison, Petitioner, v Gilbert C. Hong et al., Respondents.

[49 NYS3d 627]

The above-named *458petitioner having presented an application to this Court praying for an order, pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules, now, upon reading and filing the papers in said proceeding, and due deliberation having been had thereon, it is unanimously ordered that the application be and the same hereby is denied and the petition dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
No. 12-7925.

#### Jordan *v.*Hedgpeth, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
|                                                                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                                      
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                              
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                                                        
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                                                        
|View History:                                                                                                                         
|                                                                                                                                      
|Price of Brownsville, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Imports from Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                                      
|                                                                                                                                      
|Price of Brownsville, TX Liquefied Natural Gas Imports from Mexico (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                                      

|Year                                                                                                                              | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ----
|2019                                                                                                                              |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     |     | 2.48
|                                                                                                                                 
|- = 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
#### Com. v. Carder

09/15/2015

191, 192 WAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 122 A.3d 435
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04

- 16

- 00384

- CR IN RE Andre CLEWIS Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Jason Pulliam, Justice Delivered and Filed: July 6, 2016
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED
On June 20 , 201 6 , R elator filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the trial court to rule on relator’s “Motion to Clarify Factual Findings of Judgment Art. 42.01 (1); (7), (21) [sic].” When a motion is properly filed and pending before a trial court, the act of giving consideration to and ruling upon that motion is a ministerial act and mandamus may issue to compel the trial judge to act. See Ex parte Ybarra , 149 S.W.3 d 147, 148

- 49 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004); see also Safety

- Kleen Corp. v. Garcia , 9 45 S.W.2d 268, 269 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1997, orig. proceeding) (holding a trial court is required to consider and rule upon a motion within a reasonable time)

. Factors that a re considered in determining whether the trial court has

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2005CR9206C, styled The State of Texas v. Andre Clewis , pending in the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Mary D. Roman presiding.04

- 16

- 00384

- CR

- 2

- unnecessarily delayed a ruling includ e : (a) the trial court’s actual knowledge of the motion ; (b) the trial court’s overt refusal to act on it ; (c) the state of the court’s docket ; and (d ) the existe nce of other judicial and administrative matters requiring the court’s attention. In re Gallardo , 269 S.W.3d 643, 645 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2008, orig. proceeding).
A relator has the burden of providing this court with a record sufficient to establish a right to mandamus relief

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 52.7(a) (relator must file a certified or sworn copy of every document material to the relator’s claim for relief that was filed in underlying proceeding”). In a case such as the one before us, a r elator ha s the burden to provide a court of appeals with a record showing the trial court was made aware of the motion at issue and that such motion has not been ruled on by the trial court for an unreasonable period of time. In re Gallardo , 269 S.W.3d at 645; In re Mendoza , 131 S.W.3d 167, 167

- 68 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2004, orig. proceeding). Here, Relator did not provid e this court with a record sufficient to establish his claim for relief. Instead, Relator provided only a document entitled “ Motion to Clarify F actual Findings of Judgment Art. 42.01 (1); (7), (21) [sic] , ” which R elator asserts was filed with the district clerk i n January 2016 , but which is not file

- marked. Because the record does not establish that the motion at issue was filed with the district clerk, that the trial court has been made aware of the motion , or that the trial court has expressly refused to rule on it , we conclude R elator has not shown himself entitled to mandamus relief on this record. In re Gallardo , 269 S.W.3d at 645. Accordin gly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH