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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          58,038
<SECURITIES>                                     1,661
<RECEIVABLES>                                  828,086
<ALLOWANCES>                                    28,294
<INVENTORY>                                    408,962
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,386,374
<PP&E>                                       1,582,498
<DEPRECIATION>                                 576,500
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,519,615
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,236,941
<BONDS>                                      1,741,847
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           786
<OTHER-SE>                                   (381,167)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,519,615
<SALES>                                      5,804,561
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,804,561
<CGS>                                        4,379,765
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,379,765
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,168,998
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                11,225
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             198,192
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 57,606
<INCOME-TAX>                                   104,324
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (46,718)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (46,718)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.60)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
No. 09-9382.

#### Stanford T. Allen, Jr., Petitioner v. David Ballard, Warden, et al.

559 U.S. 1078, 130 S. Ct. 2114,

176 L. Ed. 2d 740,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3401.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 354 Fed. Appx. 827.
Comments in Clean PowerPlan for Existing Power Plants by William Lochstet

We knowfrom climate science, that ifwe do not limit global warmingto 2 degrees Celsius, the weatherwill become very hostile and dangerous. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its 2013 report ofGroup l estimate that the world couldemit up to about l.l teraton ofcarbon dioxide before reaching this limit, as illustratedby theirRCP 2.6 scenario. This scenario involves a decrease in C02 emissions from a maximumtoday to a rate about one third smaller in 2030. for the world as a whole. This scenario is expectedto result in a maximum temperature rise ofless than 2 degrees Celsius, and slowly cool to normal afterthe year 2300. They considered three other scenarios with greater emissions, all ofwhich have global temperatures increased by more than 2 degrees Celsius beyondthe year2300. These alternatives
are dangerous security risks, with major migrations and famine. As a person offaith, I cannot condone to leaving such a legacy, with very violent weather, for future generations. We must decrease carbon dioxide emissions, nationally and internationally. Currently, the United States emits about 19% ofthe world's carbon dioxide, orabout 6.5 gigaton per year. Athird ofthis, or 6% ofthe world's carbon dioxide comes from our generation ofelectricity. This industry must reduce its emissionsjustas much as any other group. As responsible citizens ofthe world. this nation must follow. ifit cannot lead, other nations to cut its emissions by one third by 2030. Such a decrease would be a compromise that gives the states and the industrytime to chose. plan, and implement the details.

The EPA has solicited comments on "Concerns from Stakeholders" in the present proposed rule notice at 79 FR 34888. At issue is whether EPA has authority to "identifY redispatch, low- orzero-emitting generation, or demand side energy efficiency measures (building blocks 2, 3 and4) as components ofthe 'best system ofemission reduction.'" The purpose ofthe rule is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and these items can be considered suggestions. Then EPA can approve a plan for a state ifit achieves a reduction in emissions in a way that is efficient and cost-effective, with or withoutthe use ofthese specific techniques.

Comments were also solicitedat 79 FR 34836 on utilization ofbuilding blocks l and 2 only. Since zero carbon generation inblock 3, and energy efficiency in block4, have such huge proven ability to reduce carbon dioxide. theirelimination would be inappropriate.

Block 3 does include nuclear generation. Irecognize that this is current policy, but it is wrong. Nuclear power depends on the ability ofpeople to anticipate in the original design everything that might go wrung. ''Humanknowledge seems endless, andyet we do not know what we do not know."* This was evident at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi. Waste disposal has not been solved.

I would commend EPA on this significant step. Thauk You.
*modifiedfrom the Iona Community WorshipBook
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,892
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,475
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      7,723
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                20,766
<PP&E>                                           8,953
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  58,017
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           50,039
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,633
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    58,017
<SALES>                                         62,154
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                62,154
<CGS>                                           44,433
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   56,855
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 628
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,671
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,821
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,850
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.85
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.76


</TABLE>
No. 09-9089.

#### Barry Wayne Adams, Petitioner v. Michigan.

559 U.S. 1053, 130 S. Ct. 2351,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3034,

176 L. Ed. 2d 569,

April 5, 2010.

Petition for writ of certio-rari to the Court of Appeals of Michigan denied.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 151 (Thursday, August 6, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 42064]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20973]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Importer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Registration

    By Notice dated April 17, 1998, and published in the Federal 
Register on April 30, 1998, (63 FR 23796), Johnson Matthey, Inc., 
Custom Pharmaceuticals Department, 2003 Nolte Drive, West Deptford, New 
Jersey 08066, made application to the Drug Enforcement Administration 
(DEA) 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.
    No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered 
the factors in Title 21, United States Code, Section 823(a) and 
determined that the registration of Johnson Matthey, Inc. to import 
phenylacetone is consistent with the public interest and with United 
States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or 
protocols in effect on May 1, 1971, at this time. Therefore, pursuant 
to Section 1008(a) of the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act 
and in accordance with Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 
1311.42, the above firm is granted registration as an importer of the 
basic classes of controlled substances listed above.

    Dated: July 17, 1998.
John H. King,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-20973 Filed 8-5-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
Exhibit
      32.1




CERTIFICATION
      FURNISHED PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
      TO




SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
      connection with the annual report of Patriot Scientific Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended May 31, 2007, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission and to which this Certification is an
      exhibit (the “Report”), the undersigned officer of Patriot Scientific
      Corporation does hereby certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b)
      of
      the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 1350 of Chapter
      63 of Title 18 of the United States Code 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his
      knowledge:




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





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





Date:
      August 14, 2007


/s/
                James L.
                Turley
              James
                L. Turley
              *Chief
                Executive Officer*
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

______________ ___ __ NO. 09
- 13
- 00 333
- CR

_______________ ___ _ MARKESHIA MARSHALL , Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 292155

__________________________________________________________________ ORDER The clerk’s record and reporter’s records were due to be filed in the Court of Appeals on August 22, 2013, but have not been filed. The trial court clerk has notified the court that she has not received payment for the record. Appellant has filed an affidavit of indigency and requested appointment of counsel , but has not
filed a brief

. The Court finds that it is necessary to determine whether the appellant is indigent and, therefore, entitled to appointed counsel and a free record on appeal. It is, therefore, ORDERED that the appeal is ABATED and the cause i s REMANDED to the trial court for a hearing to determine whether the appellant2 desires to prosecute her appeal and whether appellant is indigent. The trial court shall determine whether the appellant has been deprived of a record because of ineffective ass istance of counsel or for any other reason. For this purpose the trial judge shall conduct such hearings as may be necessary, make appropriate findings and recommendations, and prepare a record of the proceedings. If the appellant is indigent, the judge sh all take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation of counsel, which may include the appointment of counsel or ordering all or part of the records to be prepared without charge to the appellant

. The record of the hearing, includ ing any orders and findings of the trial court judge, shall be sent to the appellate court for filing in the above

- referenced appeal. The transcript of the court reporter’s notes from the hearing and the findings and recommendations of the trial court judg e are to be filed on or before September 30 , 2013.
ORDER ENTERED August 29, 2013

. PER CURIAM Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.
Exhibit 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Chen Weisheng, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of China Autoparts,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

      a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

      b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

      c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

      a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

      b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: August 13, 2004


/s/ Chen Weisheng
------------------------
Chen Weisheng
CFO
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            CERTIFICATIONS


     I Robert Salna, certify that:


     1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB,
Amendment One, of  Dover Petroleum Corp.;

     2.   Based upon my knowledge, this quarterly report does not
contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report.

     3.   Based upon my knowledge, the financial statements, and
other financial information included in this quarterly report,
fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this quarterly report.

     4.   The registrant's other certifying officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for
the registrant and have:

          (a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by
others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this quarterly report is being prepared;

          (b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's
disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior
to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date");
and

          (c)  Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures
based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date.

     5.   The registrant's other certifying officers and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, th the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

          (a)  All significant deficiencies in the design or
operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the
registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any
material weaknesses in internal controls; and

          (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant's internal controls.

     6.   The registrant's other certifying officer and I have
indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were
significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that
could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date
of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


Date: December 16, 2002            /s/Robert Salna
                                   ----------------------------
                                   Robert Salna
                                   Principal Executive Officer and
                                   Principal Financial Officer
No. 09-8336.

#### Oscar Rodriguez-Parra, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 954, 130 S. Ct. 1544,

176 L. Ed. 2d 137,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1435.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 581 F.3d 227.
No. 11-6746.

#### Eugene Tyrone Miller, Petitioner v. North Carolina.

565 U.S. 1083, 132 S. Ct. 824,

181 L. Ed. 2d 534,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8747.

December 5, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 430 Fed. Appx. 235.
No. 11-7334.

#### John Sylvester Morrison, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1128, 132 S. Ct. 1040,

181 L. Ed. 2d 765,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 11.

January 9, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 442 Fed. Appx. 873.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                     PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Anthony & Sylvan Pools Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
William J. Evanson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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.


William J. Evanson
-----------------------
William J. Evanson
Chief Financial Officer

Dated:  August 13, 2002
Description of Changes to the Compensation of Non Management Directors



 Exhibit 10(iii)(A)(73) 

Description of the Change in Compensation for Non-Management Directors and Committee Chairs 

In a July meeting of the Board of Directors (the “Board”), the Board approved changes to the total compensation paid to non-management
directors, as well as the annual fees for service as committee chairpersons. 
 Effective July 22, 2010, each non-management director will
be paid an annual cash retainer of $100,000 and annual fees for committee chairpersons increased as follows: the Audit Committee and Compensation and Leadership Talent Committee chairpersons will receive $20,000. 

In addition, each non-management director will receive an annual equity grant having a value of $100,000 on the date of grant. All equity grants will be
subject to three year transfer restrictions, except in the case of the retirement of a director.
No. 09-806.

#### Kenneth Wright, et al., Petitioners v. Eastman Kodak Company.

559 U.S. 1030, 130 S. Ct. 1884,

176 L. Ed. 2d 402,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2447.

March 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

Justice Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 328 Fed. Appx. 738.
No. 09-7902.

#### Charles D’Ary, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 945, 130 S. Ct. 1515,

176 L. Ed. 2d 123,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1357.

February 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
No. 11-6533.

#### Curtis Schleiger, Petitioner v. Ohio.

565 U.S. 1180, 132 S. Ct. 1142,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1021,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 944.

January 23, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Preble County, denied.
No. 09-38 (R46-009).

#### Health Care Service Corporation, Petitioner v. Juli A. Pollitt, et al.

559 U.S. 965, 130 S. Ct. 1574,

176 L. Ed. 2d 157,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1901.

February 24, 2010.

The writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in the above-entitled case was dismissed today pursuant to this Court’s Rule 46.1.