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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This Schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted form the
     Annual  report on Form 10-K for the year  ended  December  31,  1998 and is
     qualified  in its  entirety  by  reference  to  such  financial  staements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                           0001039300
<NAME>                         Galileo International, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                         1,000
<CURRENCY>                                             USD
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                               9,828
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      191,605
<ALLOWANCES>                                        13,747
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   243,527
<PP&E>                                             475,979
<DEPRECIATION>                                     281,010
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,291,080
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              231,826
<BONDS>                                             92,272
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             1,049
<OTHER-SE>                                         841,578
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,291,080
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,480,818
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,149,240
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     6,097
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    (3,862)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  11,876
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    325,481
<INCOME-TAX>                                       129,867
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                195,614
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       195,614
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         1.87
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         1.86
        


</TABLE>
Darryl Lamar CARTER v. STATE

CR-16-1355

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.2






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 James River Coal Company (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Samuel M. Hopkins, II, Chief Accounting 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 result of operations of the registrant.











August 5, 2010




/s/     Samuel M. Hopkins, IISamuel M. Hopkins, IITitle:  Chief Accounting Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 237 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 237

    To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to deem foods 
 containing xylitol as misbranded unless the label or labeling of such 
 foods contains a warning specifying the toxic effects of xylitol for 
               dogs if ingested, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 7, 2025

Mr. Schweikert introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to deem foods 
 containing xylitol as misbranded unless the label or labeling of such 
 foods contains a warning specifying the toxic effects of xylitol for 
               dogs if ingested, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Paws Off Act of 2025''.

SEC. 2. XYLITOL LABEL AND LABELING REQUIREMENTS.

    (a) In General.--Section 403 of the Federal Food, Drug, and 
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 343) is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
    ``(z) If it is a food that contains xylitol, unless the label or 
labeling of such food contains a warning specifying the toxic effects 
of xylitol for dogs if ingested.''.
    (b) Rulemaking.--
            (1) Interim rule.--Not later than 6 months after the date 
        of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue an interim 
        final rule to carry out the amendment made by subsection (a).
            (2) Final rule.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
        enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue a final rule 
        to carry out the amendment made by subsection (a).
    (c) Secretary Defined.--In this section, the term ``Secretary'' 
means the Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through the 
Commissioner of Food and Drugs.
                                 <all>
```
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

LUIS ONTIVEROS-DELVAL,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 11-50218

D.C. No. 2:09-cr-01137-DSF

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Dale S. Fischer, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 10, 2012** 

Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Luis Ontiveros-Delval appeals from the 120-month sentence and 15-year

term of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

conspiracy to distribute cocaine and methamphetamine, in violation of

21 U.S.C. § 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

FILED

SEP 20 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 11-50218

Ontiveros-Delval contends that the district court erred in denying a minor

role adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). The record supports the conclusion

that Ontiveros-Delval was not “substantially less culpable than the average

participant” in the conspiracy; thus, the district court did not err in denying a role

adjustment. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A); United States v. Rodriguez-Castro,

641 F.3d 1189, 1193 (9th Cir. 2011).

Ontiveros-Delval also contends that the district court relied at sentencing on

clearly erroneous facts both in denying the role adjustment and in selecting a

sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The record belies this contention.

Ontiveros-Delval next challenges the sufficiency of the court’s explanation

of the 120-month sentence and 15-year supervised release term and its

consideration of the section 3553(a) sentencing factors. The record reflects that the

court adequately considered the parties’ submissions and the statutory sentencing

factors, and its explanation of the sentence was sufficient. See United States v.

Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).

Ontiveros-Delval also argues that his 120-month prison sentence and 15-

year term of supervised release are substantively unreasonable, largely because

they are greater than the terms given to his co-defendants and exceed the

recommendation of the probation officer and, in the case of the supervised release
3 11-50218

term, of the government. The 120-month sentence, 15 months below the low end

of the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range, is substantively reasonable in light of

the section 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances. See

Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The district court also did not abuse

its discretion by imposing a 15-year term of supervised release. See United States

v. Apodaca, 641 F.3d 1077, 1079 (9th Cir. 2011). 

We grant Ontiveros-Delval’s motion to strike and deny the government’s

request for judicial notice.

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 31.2   CERTIFICATION  I, Richard W. Jackson, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Great American Family Parks, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2006;  2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:  (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer is made known to us by others, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an quarterly report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions);  (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.  August 10, 2006  /s/ Richard W. JacksonRichard W. JacksonChief Financial Officer
Tamareo Lavor MATTHEWS v. STATE

CR-16-0963

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IV 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 104 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Select Committee on the Strategic 

Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist 

Party in the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 4, 2025 

Mr. MOOLENAAR submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Select Committee 

on the Strategic Competition Between the United States 

and the Chinese Communist Party in the One Hundred 

Nineteenth Congress. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES. 

3 For the expenses of the Select Committee on the 

4 Strategic Competition Between the United States and the 

5 Chinese Communist Party (hereafter in this resolution re6 ferred to as the ‘‘Select Committee’’), including the ex7 penses of all staff salaries, there shall be paid, out of the 

8 applicable accounts of the House of Representatives for 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 104 IH 

1 committee salaries and expenses, not more than 

2 $10,740,218 for the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress. 

3 SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS. 

4 Of the amount specified in section 1— 

5 (1) not more than $5,366,830 shall be available 

6 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at 

7 noon on January 3, 2025, and ending immediately 

8 before noon on January 3, 2026; and 

9 (2) not more than $5,373,388 shall be available 

10 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at 

11 noon on January 3, 2026, and ending immediately 

12 before noon on January 3, 2027. 

13 SEC. 3. VOUCHERS. 

14 Payments under this resolution shall be made on 

15 vouchers authorized by the Select Committee, signed by 

16 the Chairman of the Select Committee, and approved in 

17 the manner directed by the Committee on House Adminis18 tration. 

19 SEC. 4. REGULATIONS. 

20 Amounts made available under this resolution shall 

21 be expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by 

22 the Committee on House Administration. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Ralph T. WEST v. STATE

CR-16-0754

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

October 6, 2017

Reh. denied.
#### Pablo Rubio, *Plaintiff in*Error, v. Armour & Company, a Corporation, *Defendant in Error.*

Opinion Filed October 21, 1927.

Petition for Rehearing Denied December 9, 1927.

*Caraballo, Moran & Graham,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Jackson, Dupree & Cone,*for Defendant in Error.

Chillingworth, Circuit .Judge:

Plaintiff brought suit for injuries alleged to have been sustained through the negligent operation of an automobile of the defendant. At conclusion of the testimony the Court directed a verdict for the defendant.

*762We believe it would serve no useful purpose to restate the testimony in this opinion. However, indulging in all proper inferences favorable to the plaintiff, it is evident that plaintiff, after having alighted from a street car, which street car was near the right hand side of the street, crossed around in front of the street car, at which point he was struck by the automobile of the defendant. The ground layout of the street, the bridge, the street car tracks, and the curb line, show that the automobile of defendant could pass the street car in no other way except proceeding on the left of the street car, and that the accident occurred in front of the street ear on the track. Plaintiff did not see the automobile, nor did the' automobile driver see the plaintiff until too late to prevent the accident.

As we view this case, the driver of the automobile could not see the plaintiff in time to prevent the injury. He was driving his car where he had a right to drive it, and at a reasonable and moderate rate of speed. It appears that plaintiff ought to have been able to see the automobile had he looked, and that plaintiff certainly had reason to know and believe that there was considerable traffic in that street at the'time he walked around in front of the street car.

An automobile driver is not an insurer of the limbs and lives of pedestrians. In case of an unavoidable accident resulting in injury to a pedestrian, from a moving automobile, the driver is not liable if there was no pre-existing negligence upon his part. Florida Motor Transportation Company v. Hillman, 87 Fla. 512, 101 So. 31.

We believe the evidence shows one of those unavoidable, unforseen accidents, for which defendant should not be held responsible.

Affirmed.

*763Ellis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.

Strum, J., dissents.

Strum, J.,

dissenting:

While I concur in the principle of law stated in the foregoing opinion, I am of the opinion that upon the facts developed by the evidence it was error to direct a verdict for the defendant. I think the case should have been submitted to the jury. I therefore dissent.
Exhibit 31.2  Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  I, Joseph Skeehan, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of JMG Exploration, Inc. 2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 the report: 4. The registrants other certifying officer 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 have: a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared; b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and c. disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors: a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.  Date: November 30, 2007  /s/ Joseph Skeehan Joseph Skeehan Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 297 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 297

To prohibit the availability of Federal funds to institutions of higher 
  education that conduct painful biomedical research on dogs and cats.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 9, 2025

 Ms. Malliotakis introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                the Committee on Education and Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prohibit the availability of Federal funds to institutions of higher 
  education that conduct painful biomedical research on dogs and cats.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Higher Education Loses Payments for 
Painful Experiments, Tests and Studies Act'' or the ``HELP PETS Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON AVAILABILITY OF FEDERAL FUNDS TO INSTITUTIONS OF 
              HIGHER EDUCATION THAT CONDUCT PAINFUL RESEARCH USING DOGS 
              AND CATS.

    (a) In General.--Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, no Federal funds may be made 
available to any institution of higher education that conducts or 
funds, in whole or in part, painful research on dogs or cats.
    (b) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to--
            (1) clinical veterinary research; or
            (2) any physical exam, training program, or study relating 
        to service animals or military animals.
    (c) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) Clinical veterinary research.--The term ``clinical 
        veterinary research'' means research on a dog or cat with a 
        naturally occurring disease or injury that is conducted--
                    (A) for the benefit of the dog or cat; and
                    (B) with the intention of studying the effect of a 
                procedure, device, or treatment protocol.
            (2) Institution of higher education.--The term 
        ``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given the 
        term in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
        U.S.C. 1002).
            (3) Military animal.--The term ``military animal'' has the 
        meaning given the term in section 2583(i)(1) of title 10, 
        United States Code.
            (4) Painful research.--The term ``painful research'' 
        includes any research, biomedical training, experimentation, or 
        biological testing classified in pain category D or E by the 
        Department of Agriculture.
            (5) Service animal.--The term ``service animal'' has the 
        meaning given the term in section 37.3 of title 49, Code of 
        Federal Regulations.
                                 <all>
```