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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1999
<CASH>                                       4,999,943
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,697,684
<ALLOWANCES>                                    27,058
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,724,842
<PP&E>                                       3,112,852
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,440,059
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,438,872
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,557,668
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     8,583,798
<OTHER-SE>                                     836,127
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,438,872
<SALES>                                      9,772,628
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,772,628
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,614,950
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                26,738
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             109,170
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,075,246
<INCOME-TAX>                                    33,482
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,041,764
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,041,764
<EPS-BASIC>                                      0.089
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.079


</TABLE>
David Dewayne JONES v. STATE

CR-16-1085

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 824 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 824

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 17 East Main Street in Herington, Kansas, as the ``Captain Emil J. 
                     Kapaun Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 18, 2021

Mr. Moran (for himself and Mr. Marshall) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 17 East Main Street in Herington, Kansas, as the ``Captain Emil J. 
                     Kapaun Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. CAPTAIN EMIL J. KAPAUN POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 17 East Main Street in Herington, Kansas, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Captain Emil J. Kapaun Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Captain 
Emil J. Kapaun Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
Ronnie GAINES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4686

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 24, 2019

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Jasmine Quintera Russell, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Makar, Osterhaus, and Jay, JJ., concur.
STATE of Louisiana v. Tommy Lee WILSON

No. 2018-KH-1351

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 29, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF CADDO**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. Applicant fails to show he received ineffective assistance of counsel under the standard of *Strickland v. Washington* , 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). As to the remaining claim, applicant fails to satisfy his post-conviction burden of proof. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.2.

Applicant has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Applicant's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, applicant has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
EXHIBIT
32.2


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of DYNAMIC ALERT LIMITED (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Donald Cameron,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





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





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











Date:
November 12, 2009














By:           /s/
Donald Cameron


Donald
Cameron


Secretary,
      Treasurer, principal financial officer and principal accounting
      officer
Case 3:05-cv-00035-R Document 3 Filed 03/01/05 Page 1 of 4 PageID 35
 

 Case 3:05-cv-00035-R Document 3 Filed 03/01/05 Page 2 of 4 PageID 36
 

 Case 3:05-cv-00035-R Document 3 Filed 03/01/05 Page 3 of 4 PageID 37
 

 Case 3:05-cv-00035-R Document 3 Filed 03/01/05 Page 4 of 4 PageID 38
Case 3:05-cv-02005-L Document 12 Filed 02/14/06 Page 1 of 3 PageID 68
 

 Case 3:05-cv-02005-L Document 12 Filed 02/14/06 Page 2 of 3 PageID 69
 

 Case 3:05-cv-02005-L Document 12 Filed 02/14/06 Page 3 of 3 PageID 70
Case 1:05-cv-00184-C Document 85 Filed 12/23/05 Page 1 of 4 PageID 1385
Case 1:05-cv-00184-C Document 85 Filed 12/23/05 Page 2 of 4 PageID 1386
Case 1:05-cv-00184-C Document 85 Filed 12/23/05 Page 3 of 4 PageID 1387
Case 1:05-cv-00184-C Document 85 Filed 12/23/05 Page 4 of 4 PageID 1388
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

JEFFREY CARROLL §

§

Petitioner, §

§

VS. §

§ NO. 3-05-CV-1401-N 

DOUGLAS DRETKE, Director §

Texas Department of Criminal Justice, §

Correctional Institutions Division §

§

Respondent. §

ORDER

After conducting a review of the pleadings, files and records in this case, and the Findings

and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1), I am of the opinion that the Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are

correct and they are hereby accepted as the Findings of the Court. 

SO ORDERED September 26, 2005.

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-01401-N Document 8 Filed 09/26/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 30
Kayan E. SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-1235

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 25, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Anthony BRUNSON, Appellant, v. Howard FOULKE, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2964

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 25, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Jarrod ROBERTS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-1567

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 5, 2019 Rehearing Denied April 11, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Case 3:05-cv-01034-B Document 26 Filed 02/08/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 256
# C_2018112EN.01001901.xml

| 26.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/19

---

Action brought on 22 December 2017 — European Commission v Hungary

(Case C-718/17)

(2018/C 112/25)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: A. Tokár and G. Wils, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Hungary

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that by failing to indicate, at regular intervals, and at least every three months, the number of applicants who can be relocated swiftly to its territory, Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(2) of Council Decision (EU) 2015/1601 and, consequently, has also failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(4) to (11) of that decision. |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that by failing to indicate, at regular intervals, and at least every three months, the number of applicants who can be relocated swiftly to its territory, Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(2) of Council Decision (EU) 2015/1601 and, consequently, has also failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(4) to (11) of that decision.

| — | Order Hungary to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order Hungary to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The two decisions adopted by the Council in September 2015, namely, Council Decision (EU) 2015/1523 (1) and Council Decision (EU) 2015/1601, (2) established a temporary and emergency relocation scheme, under which the Member States had the obligation to relocate from the territory of Italy and Greece persons in need of international protection.

1

2

The Council Decisions obliged the Member States to offer every quarter places for applicants who can be relocated, ensuring thereby the prompt and orderly processing of the relocation procedure. Although nearly all the Member States relocated applicants and met their obligations in this field, Hungary has not adopted any kind of measure since the start of the relocation scheme.

On 16 June 2017, the Commission initiated infringement proceedings against Hungary concerning Council Decision (EU) 2015/1601.

Considering that Hungary’s response was unsatisfactory, the Commission moved on to the next step of the infringement proceedings and, on 26 July 2017, sent Hungary a reasoned opinion.

Considering that the reply to the reasoned opinion was unsatisfactory as well, the Commission decided to bring the case before the Court of Justice for a declaration that Hungary had failed to fulfil its relocation obligations.

---

(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/1523 of 14 September 2015 establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and of Greece (OJ 2015 L 239, p. 146).

1

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/1601 of 22 September 2015 establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and Greece (OJ 2015 L 248, p. 80).

2

---
Wilson A. PORTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2381

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[May 2, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.12

                                SECOND AMENDMENT
                                     TO THE
                     H&R BLOCK, INC. EXECUTIVE SURVIVOR PLAN

         H&R Block, Inc. (the "Company") adopted the amended and restated H&R
Block, Inc. Executive Survivor Plan (the "Plan"), effective as of January 1,
2001. The Company adopted the First Amendment to the Plan effective July 1,
2002. Section 4.1 of the Plan provides that the Company may amend the Plan from
time to time. In accordance with the provisions of that Section, effective March
12, 2003, the Plan is amended as follows:

         1.       The definition of "Affiliate" in Article 1 of the Plan is
amended by (A) removing H&R Block Mortgage Corporation, Inc., an Ontario
Corporation as an Affiliate, and (B) adding HRB Business Services, Inc. and H&R
Block Small Business Resources, Inc. as Affiliates.

         2.       The definition of "Eligibility Committee" in Article 1 of the
Plan is amended by deleting the words "Chief Executive Officer of the Company"
and replacing them with the words "Chief Operating Officer of the Company (or
the Chief Executive Officer of the Company if there is no Chief Operating
Officer of the Company)".

         3.       The definition of "Retirement/Retired" in Article 1 of the
Plan is amended by deleting the words "the Company or" in both places in the
first sentence thereof.

         4.       Except as modified in this Second Amendment, the Plan shall
remain in full force and effect, including the Company's right to amend or
terminate the Plan as set forth in Section 4.1 of the Plan.

                                      H&R BLOCK, INC.

Dated:  March 12, 2003                By:  /s/ Mark A. Ernst
                                           --------------------------------
                                           Mark A. Ernst
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
S
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
     CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF TRAILER BRIDGE, INC. AS OF AND FOR THE
     ONE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
     REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001039184
<NAME>                        Trailer Bridge, Inc.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           5,561,996
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,584,854
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,093,403)
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,823,044
<PP&E>                                          68,893,325
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (6,838,687)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  89,229,089
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,859,945
<BONDS>                                         35,387,182
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            97,775
<OTHER-SE>                                      31,246,152
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    89,229,089
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                77,240,644
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   80,286,293
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   828,514
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,040,721
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,035,769
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (3,874,163
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,358,133)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,516,030)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,516,030)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.26)
        

</TABLE>
Case 2:05-cv-00153-J Document 1 Filed 06/23/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1
III 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 6 

Expressing the thanks of the Senate to the Honorable Patty Murray for 

her service as President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate 

and to desiginate Senator Murray as President Pro Tempore Emerita 

of the United States Senate. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. SCHUMER submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 

agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the thanks of the Senate to the Honorable Patty 

Murray for her service as President Pro Tempore of 

the United States Senate and to desiginate Senator Murray as President Pro Tempore Emerita of the United 

States Senate. 

1 Resolved, That the United States Senate expresses its 

2 deepest gratitude to Senator Murray for her dedication 

3 and commitment during her service to the Senate as the 

4 President Pro Tempore. 

5 Further, as a token of appreciation of the Senate for 

6 her long and faithful service, Senator Patty Murray is 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 6 ATS 

1 hearby designated President Pro Tempore Emerita of the 

2 United States Senate. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
**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 CuraTech Industries, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
      Lincoln M. Dastrup, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to
      18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:





(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
                Company.











Lincoln
      M. Dastrup


Chief
      Financial Officer


November
      18, 2008





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been
      provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. The foregoing
      certifications are accompanying the Company's Form 10-Q solely pursuant to
      section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
      section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and are not being
      filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure
      document.
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

May 12, 2014

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

QUETZELINA LUBE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

NCO FINANCIAL SERVICES,

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 14-1014

(D.C. No. 1:02-CV-02158-MSK-PAC)

(D. Colo.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before GORSUCH, MURPHY, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.

Quetzelina Lube’s appeal comes to us almost a decade after her suit was

dismissed. Since that dismissal Ms. Lube has filed repeated motions for

reconsideration. This appeal concerns the latest effort. We discern no reversible

error in the district court’s decision to deny Ms. Lube’s current motion. Even

viewing it generously, the two paragraph pleading does not specify grounds for

reconsideration sufficient to meet the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). And

*

 After examining the brief and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is

therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is

not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata,

and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value

consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
to the extent Ms. Lube seeks to challenge the original dismissal of her suit, the

time for that appeal has passed. 

Affirmed.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Neil M. Gorsuch

Circuit Judge

2
Deano S. ESPOSITA, Appellant, v. WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB and Jay Lovett, as Trustee for the Overland Capital Trust, Appellees.

Case No. 5D18-1235

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 30, 2019

**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 Smartmetric, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jay Needelman,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section
1350 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 Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or
after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing.




Dated:
      February 17,
      2009
                By:
                /s/ Jay
      NeedelmanJay
      Needelman (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)Chief
      Financial Officer
Case 4:04-cv-00855-R Document 10 Filed 03/25/05 Page 1 of 4 PageID 138
 

 Case 4:04-cv-00855-R Document 10 Filed 03/25/05 Page 2 of 4 PageID 139
 

 Case 4:04-cv-00855-R Document 10 Filed 03/25/05 Page 3 of 4 PageID 140
 

 Case 4:04-cv-00855-R Document 10 Filed 03/25/05 Page 4 of 4 PageID 141