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




<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          46,735
<SECURITIES>                                   449,917
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,474
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               557,506
<PP&E>                                         317,165
<DEPRECIATION>                                 121,436
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,838,603
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          148,150
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,855
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,681,598
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,838,603
<SALES>                                         90,411
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                90,411
<CGS>                                           19,129
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  657,753
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                66,235
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,789
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (524,300)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (524,300)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (524,300)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.59)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.59)
        



</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 12.1**I, Shimon Yitzhaki, certify that:1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Elbit Medical Imaging Ltd. (the“Company”); 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report; 4. The Company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a- 15(e)and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a- 15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Company and have: (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis annual report is being prepared;  (b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused suchinternal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, toprovide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generallyaccepted accounting principles;  (c) evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (d) disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and theaudit committee of Company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and
 

 
 (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: July 2, 2007       /s/ Shimon Yitzhaki    Shimon Yitzhaki    President
# Logistics on Location: DLA helps Army train tank mechanics 

/ Published Aug. 30, 2019
Fort Benning, Georgia, 
At the Fort Benning Maneuver Center of Excellence the mission of the United States Army Armor School is to train tank and Bradley mechanics. DLA supports the FBMCOE with parts, uniforms, food, fuel and more ensuring they can accomplish their mission.

                                                                                                      View the video on YouTube.
#### Com. v. Barksdale

12/11/2015

351 WAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 125 A.3d 463
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ARMANDO HERNANDEZ VILLALBA, 

AKA Amando Hernandez, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 15-73711 

Agency No. A205-714-205 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 17, 2022**

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. 

Armando Hernandez Villalba, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for 

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal 

from an immigration judges’ decision denying his application for withholding of 

removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), and denying 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAY 26 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 15-73711 

his request for administrative closure. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C § 1252. 

We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Silaya v. 

Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Hernandez 

Villalba did not establish nexus between the harm he fears in Mexico and a 

protected ground. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (“An 

[applicant’s] desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or 

random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground.”). 

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because 

Hernandez Villalba failed to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured 

by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. 

See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

We reject as unsupported by the record Hernandez Villalba’s contentions 

that the agency ignored arguments or otherwise erred in analyzing his withholding 

of removal and CAT claims. 

In his opening brief, Hernandez Villalba does not raise, and has therefore 

waived, any challenge to the agency’s denial of administrative closure. See LopezVasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically 

raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived). 

To the extent Hernandez Villalba separately requests remand to seek 
3 15-73711 

prosecutorial discretion, the request is denied. See Morales de Soto v. Lynch, 824 

F.3d 822, 828-29 (9th Cir. 2016) (declining to remand for petitioner to seek 

prosecutorial discretion).

Hernandez Villalba’s request, raised at Docket Entry No. 32, for remand or 

termination of proceedings, is denied. See Karingithi v. Whitaker, 913 F.3d 1158, 

1160-62 (9th Cir. 2019) (rejecting contention that lack of hearing information in 

notice to appear deprived immigration court of jurisdiction).

The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the 

mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Trinae Romaine, Appellant.

[51 NYS3d 72]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Melissa C. Jackson, J.), rendered April 22, 2014, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the third degree, and sentencing her to five years’ probation, and ordering her to pay restitution, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). Moreover, the evidence of defendant’s guilt was overwhelming. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations. The evidence lacked any reasonable explanation other than that defendant, who was motivated to steal the victim’s phone because it contained a damaging recording of defendant, used pepper spray on the victim for the purpose of stealing the phone, and stole it as part of a single incident.

Even if the court improvidently exercised its discretion when it denied defendant’s request to introduce extrinsic evidence of an alleged prior inconsistent statement made by the victim, any error in the court’s ruling was harmless *(see People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230 [1975]).

Concur — Renwick, J.P., Mazzarelli, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman and Webber, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 15 (Friday, January 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 3592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1567]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science and Engineering; 
Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub.L 92-
463, as amended, the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science and 
Engineering (#1173).
    Date and Time: February 9-10, 1998; 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and 
8:45 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Place: Room 1235, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson 
Blvd., Arlington, VA.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Contact Person: Sue Kemnitzer, Executive Secretary, Room 585, 
NSF, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, Va. 22230. Phone: (703) 306-1382.
    Minutes: May be obtained from the contact person at the above 
address.
    Purpose of Meeting: To advise NSF on policies and activities of 
the Foundation to encourage full participation of women, minorities, 
and persons with disabilities currently underrepresented in 
scientific, engineering, professional, and technical fields and to 
advise NSF concerning implementation of the provisions of the 
Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act.

Agenda

    1. Briefing on congressional activities related to science and 
engineering, including briefing on FY 1999 congressional budget;
    2. NSF's GPRA Strategic Plan review;
    3. Follow up on development of a Strategic Plan for the 
Committee and other items from previous meetings; and
    4. Briefings and discussions on capacity building, disability 
issues, and education partnerships.

    Dated: January 15, 1998.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 98-1567 Filed 1-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
# Defense Logistics Agency team supports White House initiative with up to $2.78B in testing supplies

/ Published Sept. 29, 2021
PHILADELPHIA, 
The Defense Logistics Agency awarded six contracts with a combined maximum value of just over $2.78 billion for up to 150 million at-home and 400 million point-of-care COVID-19 test kits in support of White House initiatives to defeat COVID-19.

DLA Troop Support Medical Director of Customer Operations Daniel Keefe and his team worked tirelessly through the Labor Day weekend until the final award was made on Sept. 17, 2021, to meet the Department of Health and Human Services’ requirements and timeline.

“These test kits will be utilized across the nation in the battle against the spread of COVID-19 ... A truly amazing effort that will be undertaken by the awardees as they partner with DLA, HHS, and other federal agencies in delivering this most vital product,” Keefe said.

Keefe credited his team - which included, Medical Electronic Catalog Division Chief Eileen Motta in the lead role, as well as integrated support team chief Charles Reimer and acquisition specialists Christina Izzi and Denise Taubman - with the timely, and strenuous acquisition.

Other key players noted by Keefe included the Office of General Counsel representatives that helped navigate the acquisition, including: Michael Wilson, Zen Schaper and Katherine McCulloch.

The combination of test types was requested by HHS to support the White House initiative announced Sept. 9, 2021. Kits will be sent on a recurring basis to federally qualified health centers, nursing homes, colleges and universities and other vulnerable populations over the one-year period of the respective contracts, Keefe said. 

“I’m very proud of the work our DLA Troop Support Medical Supply Chain professionals contributed in making these COVID-19 testing awards ... supporting [Department of Defense] and Whole of Government partners,” DLA Troop Support Commander Army Brig. Gen. Eric P. Shirley said.

See the DLA COVID-19 Information page for more on the agency’s ongoing efforts.
#### Com. v. Williams

04/04/2016

8 WAL (2016)

Denied

Pa.Super., 135 A.3d 663
#### Com. v. Hynson 25

03/15/2016

857 MAL (2015)

25

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

Denied

Pa.Super., 133 A.3d 65
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

January 27, 2009 

s0120 

Order 

 

January 27, 2009 

137602 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137602 

 COA: 287015 

Oakland CC: 07-215386-FH 

JERRY LYNN WAGNER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 10, 2008 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 104 (Monday, June 1, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 29756]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14565]


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

LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION


Sunshine Act Meeting of the Board of Directors Committee on 
Provision for the Delivery of Legal Services

TIME AND DATE: The Committee on Provision for the Delivery of Legal 
Services of the Legal Services Corporation Board of Directors will meet 
on June 12, 1998. The meeting will begin at 2:00 p.m. and continue 
until conclusion of the committee's agenda.

LOCATION: Legal Services Corporation, 750 First Street NE., Washington, 
DC 20002.
STATUS OF MEETING: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
    1. Approval of agenda.
    2. Approval of minutes of the April 6, 1998, committee meeting.
    3. Presentation by two LSC grantees on the effective use of 
technology to provide services in remote areas and to provide helpful 
and timely information over the Internet.
    4. Report by the Inspector General on IPA reports of grantees with 
fiscal years ending December 31, 1997.
    5. Consider and act on other business.

CONTACT PERSON FOR INFORMATION: Victor M. Fortuno, General Counsel and 
Secretary of the Corporation, at (202) 336-8810.

SPECIAL NEEDS: Upon request, meeting notices will be made available in 
alternate formats to accommodate visual and hearing impairments. 
Individuals who have a disability and need an accommodation to attend 
the meeting may notify the Office of the General Counsel at (202) 336-
8810.

    Dated: May 28, 1998.
Victor M. Fortuno,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 98-14565 Filed 5-28-98; 2:30 pm]
BILLING CODE 7050-01-M
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 Health Grades, Inc. Certification by the Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to Rule 15d-14(b) Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934   I, Kerry R. Hicks, Chief Executive Officer of Health Grades, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
Company), hereby certify that, based on my knowledge: (1) The Companys annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the Form
10-K) 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 Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company. *  *  * KERRY R. HICKSKerry R. HicksPresident and CEO
 Date: March 31, 2005
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 110 (Tuesday, June 9, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31456-31457]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15224]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-234-000]


CNG Transmission Corporation; Notice of Tariff Filing

June 3, 1998.
    Take notice that on May 29, 1998, CNG Transmission Corporation 
(CNG) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, with an effective 
date of July 1, 1998:

Thirty-Eighth Revised Sheet No. 32
Thirty-Eighth Revised Sheet No. 33
Third Revised Sheet No. 361A

    CNG states that proposed Sheet 361A contains CNG's revised tariff 
language to Section 18.5, Accelerated Capital Recovery Mechanism (ACRM) 
surcharge, of the General Terms and Conditions of its FERC Gas Tariff. 
Revised Sheet Numbers 32 and 33 reflect the revised ACRM surcharge. CNG 
requests an effective date of June 15, 1998, for the revised Section 
18.5, the date which the Commission accepted CNG's ACRM surcharge in 
the above-referenced Orders.
    CNG states that the purpose of this filing is to revise CNG's ACRM 
surcharge. As revised, CNG would bill this surcharge July 1, 1998, 
through December 31, 2000, in accordance with the proposed Section 18.5 
of the General Terms and Conditions set forth in CNG's FERC Gas Tariff. 
Although the Commission approved the surcharge effective June 15, 1998, 
CNG proposes to actually assess the surcharge effective July 1, 1998 to 
avoid multiple administrative difficulties. These include billing 
complications due to multiple rates for the same month, and 
interference with capacity release transactions. Further, CNG's request 
is analogous to GISB standard 1.3.28 that

[[Page 31457]]

prohibits a mid-month rate change for fuel retention.
    CNG states that copies of its filing have been mailed to CNG's 
customers and interested state commissions.
    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, NE., Washington, DC 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 as provided 
in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 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.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-15224 Filed 6-8-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Abdul Robinson, Appellant.

[60 NYS3d 818]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie Wittner, J.), rendered May 8, 2014, unanimously affirmed.

Application by defendant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833 [1st Dept 1976]). We have reviewed this record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no non-frivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 460.20, defendant may apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that Court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that Court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within 30 days after service of a copy of this order.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the judge or justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other judge or justice.

Concur— Sweeny, J.P., Moskowitz, Kahn and Gesmer, JJ.
159 A.3d 890

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. MITCHELL WEST, DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

February 1, 2017

ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

A petition for certification of the judgment in [ A-XXXXXX-XX ] having been submitted to this Court, and the Court having considered the same;

*15It is ORDERED that the petition for certification is denied.
#### Dejesus v CEC Entertainment, Inc.

4th Dept: 138 AD3d 1390

denied
Exhibit 32.2

                         THE MONARCH CEMENT COMPANY
                         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 Quarterly Report of The Monarch Cement Company (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to The Monarch Cement Company and will be retained by The
Monarch Cement Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.


Dated:  August 11, 2004

                                         /S/ Debra P. Roe
                                        Debra P. Roe, CPA
                                        Chief Financial Officer and
                                        Assistant Secretary-Treasurer