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

<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000710182
<NAME> TXU ELECTRIC COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       15,324
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                        613
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                             556
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                         1,780
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  18,273
<COMMON>                                         3,441
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                         (11)
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                              3,030
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                   6,460
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              845
<PREFERRED>                                        115
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                             4,780
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                 258
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      735
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                   5,080
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                   18,273
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                        2,788
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                               109
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       2,156
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       2,265
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                            523
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                (10)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                     525
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           259
<NET-INCOME>                                       268
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          5
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                      263
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                          230
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                             796
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Lee W. BRUCE, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, Respondent.

No. 04-3103.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

April 12, 2004.

Capt. Tracey R. Rockenbach, Principal Attorney, Rosslyn, VA, David B. Stinson, Todd M. Hughes, David M. Cohen, of Counsel, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Lee W. Bruce, of Counsel Attorney, South Dennis, MA, for Petitioner.

ORDER

The petitioner having failed to file the brief required by Federal Circuit Rule 31(a) within the time permitted by the rules, it is

ORDERED that the petition for review be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED, *703for failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules.
##### 



Exhibit 12
  TEXTRON
    FINANCIAL CORPORATION
    COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
    (Dollars in millions)
  Three Months EndedMarch 31, 2008Income before income taxes

$
42FIXED CHARGES:Interest on debt


86Estimated interest portion of rents


1Total fixed charges


87Adjusted income

$
129Ratio of earnings to fixed charges(1)


1.48x     (1)
    
    The ratio of earnings to fixed charges has been computed by
    dividing income before income taxes and fixed charges by fixed
    charges. Fixed charges consist of interest on debt and one-third
    rental expense as representative of interest portion of rentals.
\Aa2^W^ "2054 3-QCO\ <Vo Cbvi^V c£ CcivAiml Appeals ^/W-3'l tyo FeAefo\ Buc&iu ofImjes^galiGfi ^(Hbna/ feEfuloF Texas MAY 04 2Q15 

### MW^tokftevivV c5Kc£r ferc^feS^^^arfebb^fe^to- per^iry .fraud tw1 ^m*^^p^^^ putted aqim m k? "TfeXOS 1AWL lt> GTO5J0U<au ' WW M <*kv " ^ ^^ '^ <a umxu \tJiXMS [\\ fftU

berqejcrt; to\^WmWm i^p u«t^ found Ajmo %efee\A\feV\cf&A^ *w^VC8r&Zi3 C^x\^\C| Pra\*kW affee.- Sm/fe&A cs^-\^f^-\W^,t^sJrinY teftuski neuter euer\ kd kirn ikd x had •WkA^o^ s\<Aed ^Vwjr sh&cwxi :tWwe horn &m efe fecfefe)Vi^s am M



### 4A xtaifenftS' awed a<*in ,mtef eam&Joouri, wwer &-aqSX, 

### Vcme or vekries owlAkatx huje najer rc^ei Ossify /&£ Aulfe Y

### wms ^teo x was mM om<mi wkfy fee htrnm weM, Llc fljyoiieg. ^Kl\a^f|^i.84; uA ^pasted d«jkLos> eM/eoii. ftU^tafi

&moV&M", 

### owes <£ ^^o&^gH^ 

### x, S^vHsW^£sa\(Tftcxi Ma ieea% ibeuvQ ^esec^k/ "illegally ir^rcec^Aed w A^Rosm-eu X Uvut, do sUr€ Wt % ab^e fefik aire ^^RICK .toVI-Ks€^5A M Sb^"2>«3p?
Curtis L. THOMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-3656

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[June 27, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 26, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 20465]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10246]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[OK-001; FRN-5197-3]

Clean Air Act Interim Approval of Operating Permits Program; 
Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality; Extension of Comment 
Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; Extension of the comment period.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is extending the comment period for a proposed rule 
published March 10, 1995 (60 FR 13088). On March 10, 1995, EPA proposed 
source category-limited interim approval of the operating permits 
program submitted by the State of Oklahoma. EPA received letters from 
the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ), the Department 
of the Air Force (Tinker AFB), and Mobil Exploration & Producing US 
Incorporated requesting an extension of the public comment period. 
Therefore, EPA is extending the comment period until May 10, 1995.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing on or before May 10, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Ms. 
Jole C. Luehrs, Chief, New Source Review Section, at the Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Programs Branch (6T-AN), 1445 Ross 
Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wm. Nicholas Stone, New Source Review 
Section, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone 214-665-7226.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Dated: April 19, 1995.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Deputy Regional Administrator (6A).
[FR Doc. 95-10246 Filed 4-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
Case No.: 5:17-cv-00845-EJD

JUDGMENT

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

KRANCLE ENVIEH,

Plaintiff,

v.

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 5:17-cv-00845-EJD 

JUDGMENT

Defendants’ motion to dismiss having been granted,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that judgment is entered in 

favor of Defendants.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 12, 2017

______________________________________

EDWARD J. DAVILA

United States District Judge
STATE of Louisiana v. George BEEBE, Jr.

No. 2019-KK-527

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 28, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF VERMILION**

Writ denied.

HUGHES, J., would grant and assigns reasons.

Hughes, J., would grant the writ.

Defendant specifically alleges that according to the report of Sgt. Ryan Boutte, *564count 3 occurred in Acadia Parish, not Vermilion.

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure article 615 requires the state to prove this jurisdictional issue prior to trial. The writ application represents that the state presented no evidence on this issue, while the defendant introduced into evidence the entire report of Sgt. Boutte.

A verdict rendered in a parish without jurisdiction would be absolutely null and possibly taint the verdict on other counts. The issue of jurisdiction is required to be resolved in advance of trial to avoid leaving the door open for appeal and post-conviction relief. A stitch in time saves nine.
<PAGE>
                                   EXHIBIT XI
                            U.S.B. HOLDING CO., INC.
                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
 
                   FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1997
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                  THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                    MARCH 31, 1997
                                             ----------------------------
                                              (000'S, EXCEPT SHARE DATA)
<S>                                           <C>
Weighted average number of common shares              
  outstanding................................          6,187,305

Assuming exercise of options reduced by the 
  number of shares which could have been
  purchased with the proceeds from exercise
  of such options............................            445,287
                                                ----------------------
Weighted average common and common                    
  equivalent shares..........................          6,632,592
                                                ----------------------
                                                ----------------------
Net income...................................          $   2,332

Less: Preferred stock dividend requirements..                 34
                                                ----------------------
Net income available to common                       
  shareholders...............................          $   2,298
                                                ----------------------
                                                ----------------------
Net income per common and common equivalent           
  share......................................          $    0.35
                                                ----------------------
                                                ----------------------
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

                           CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


         I, Lisa K. Vansickle, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of First Banks,  Inc. (the "Company"),  certify,  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

          (1)  The  Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-Q  of the  Company  for  the
               quarterly  period  ended  June  30,  2008  (the  "Report")  fully
               complies with the  requirements of Sections 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.


Date:  August 13, 2008


                                    By: /s/ Lisa K. Vansickle
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                            Lisa K. Vansickle
                                            Senior Vice President and
                                            Chief Financial Officer
                                            (Principal Financial and Accounting
                                            Officer)
Unassociated Document


     

    Exhibit
10.10

    


    Power
of Attorney

    


    I, Shudong Xia, a citizen of the
People’s Republic of China (the “PRC”), ID card No. 422125721020561, hereby
irrevocably grant a power of attorney in favor of Oriental Intra-Asia
Entertainment (China) Limited to exercise powers and rights during the term of
this Power of Attorney in connection with the followings:

    


     Oriental Intra-Asia Entertainment
(China) Limited is authorized to have full power to excise on my behalf all
voting rights as a shareholder at the shareholders’ meetings of China TransInfo
Technology Group Co., Ltd. (the “Company”) that having been given to me by law
and by the Articles of Association of the Company, including but not limited to,
the voting rights regarding the sale or transfer of all or part of the equity of
the Company held by myself and acting as my authorized representative at the
shareholders’ meeting of the Company to designate and appoint the directors of
the Company.

    


    Unless
otherwise the Operating
Agreement jointly executed by the Company, Zhiping Zhang, Zhibin Lai, Wei
Gao, myself and Oriental Intra-Asia Entertainment (China) Limited is earlier
terminated for any reasons, the term of this Power of Attorney is ten (10) years
commencing from the execution date of this Power of Attorney.  This
Power of Attorney is executed in English.

     

    
      
        
          
            
              
                	/s/
      Shudong Xia	 
	 
      	 
	
                        Shudong
      Xia

                      	 
	 	 
	February
      3, 2009
Exhibit 23.1




Simon & Edward, LLP

Certified Public Accountants & Consultants

A PCAOB Registered CPA Firm



17700 Castleton Street, Suite 488

City of Industry, CA 91748, U.S.A

Tel: +1 (626) 854-6500

Fax: +1 (626) 854-6505

http://www.2mycpa.com





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED ACCOUNTING FIRM





We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of Xodtec LED, Inc. on Form S-8, File No. 333-169007, of our report dated July 15, 2010, except for note 6 and 16, as to which the date is March 14, 2011, which appears in this annual report on Form 10-K/A for the years ended February 28, 2010 and February 28, 2009.








Simon & Edward, LLP


March 21, 2011
Don A. HAMPTON, petitioner, v. METHODIST HEALTHCARE SYSTEM OF SAN ANTONIO, LIMITED., L.L.P., et al.

No. 12-900.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
**Exhibit 4.18**

**BROOKFIELD INFRASTRUCTURE PARTNERS L.P.**

**AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED LIMITED PARTNERSHIPAGREEMENT**

**THIS AMENDMENT**(the “**Amendment**”) to the Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement (the“**Agreement**”) dated as of December 4, 2007 of Brookfield Infrastructure Partners L.P. (the “**Partnership**”) is made as of the 13th day of June, 2008, by the undersigned. Capitalized terms used but not definedherein shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement. 

**WHEREAS**, pursuant to Section 14.1 of the Agreement, subject tocompliance with the requirements of the Limited Partnership Act and the Exempted Partnerships Act, the General Partner (pursuant to its powers of attorney from the Limited Partners), without the approval of any Limited Partner, may amend anyprovision of the Agreement to reflect certain changes, as provided for in Section 14.1, including a change that, as determined by the General Partner in its sole discretion, does not adversely affect the Limited Partners as a whole (includingany particular class of Partnership Interests as compared to other classes of Partnership Interests) in any material respect; 

**ANDWHEREAS**, the General Partner desires to amend the Agreement as set out herein; 

**NOW THEREFORE**, 

**1.** The following shall be added as a new Section 11.1.1.7 of the Agreement: 

“11.1.1.7 be deemed to ratify and confirm all contracts, agreements, assignments and instruments entered into on behalf of the Partnership, in accordance with this Agreement, including, without limitation, thegranting of any charge or security interest over the assets of the Partnership and the assumption of any indebtedness in connection with the affairs of the Partnership.” 

**2.** The following shall be added to the end of Section 11.2 of the Agreement: 

“A successorGeneral Partner shall be deemed to ratify and confirm all contracts, agreements, assignments and instruments entered into on behalf of the Partnership, in accordance with this Agreement, including, without limitation, the granting of any charge orsecurity interest over the assets of the Partnership and the assumption of any indebtedness in connection with the affairs of the Partnership.” 

**3.** This amendment shall be effective upon the date first written above. 

**4.** Except as modified herein, all terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

**[Remainder of this page left blank intentionally.]**

 

- 2 - 

**IN WITNESS WHEREOF**, the General Partner has executed this Amendment as of the date first abovewritten. 

 
**BROOKFIELD INFRASTRUCTURE PARTNERS LIMITED,**as General Partner****Per:   Name:  Title: 
 

- 3 -
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-1678
GRAHAM H. ARCHER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus W.D. WILLIAMS, Doctor; D.M. PORRECA; MARSHALL UNIVERSITY, Research and Economic Development Center, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert J. Staker, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-534-3) Submitted: February 13, 1997 Decided: February 25, 1997 Before WIDENER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Graham H. Archer, Appellant Pro Se. Cheryl Lynne Connelly, CAMPBELL, WOODS, BAGLEY, EMERSON, MCNEER & HERNDON, Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Graham Archer appeals the district court's order dismissinghis employment discrimination complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Archer v. Williams , No. CA-94-534-3 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 26, 1996).Archer filed several motions for appointment of counsel, for correction of clerical errors in the district court's opinion, to compel, for discovery, and for transcripts at government expense. We deny these motions. Appellees filed a motion to strike various documents, filed by Archer with his informal brief, pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 10. We grant the Appellees' motion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Michael GRESHAM, petitioner, v. Gary CAPELLO, Warden.

No. 12-9523.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Michael E. Lehman, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Sun Microsystems, Inc. on Form 10-Q for
the period ended December 28, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Sun Microsystems, Inc.



|                       |  |        |  |                        
|---------------------- |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
|Date: February 5, 2009 |  | By:    |  | /s/ MICHAEL E. LEHMAN  
|                       |  | Name:  |  | Michael E. Lehman      
|                       |  | Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Subramanian Sundaresh, certify to the best of my knowledge based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q of Adaptec, Inc. for the quarter ended September 26, 2008 (the "Form 10-Q"), that the
Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and that information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Adaptec, Inc. for the quarterly periods covered by the Form 10-Q.

|Date: November 3, 2008 | By: /s/ SUBRAMANIAN SUNDARESH
                Subramanian SundareshChief Executive Officer
|---------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I, Mary L. Dotz, certify to the best of my knowledge based upon a review of the Form 10-Q, that the Form 10-Q
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
and that information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Adaptec, Inc. for the periods covered by the Form 10-Q.

|Date: November 3, 2008 | By: /s/ MARY L. DOTZ
                Mary L. DotzChief Financial Officer
|---------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
FORM OF ITEM
1123 CERTIFICATION OF SERVICER




March 12,
2008




Merrill
Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc.
 250 Vesey
Street
 4 World
Financial Center, 10th Floor
 New York,
New York 10080
 LaSalle
Bank National Association
 Attention:
EDGAR Team
 135 South
LaSalle Street, Suite 1511
 Chicago,
Illinois 60603
  Re:
                Pooling
      and Servicing Agreement (the "Agreement"), dated as of September 1, 2007,
      among Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc., as depositor, Home Loan
      Services, Inc., as servicer, and LaSalle Bank National Association, as
      trustee, relating to Merrill Lynch First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust,
      Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series
  2007-5
   I, Steven
A. Baranet, Vice President, of Home Loan Services, Inc. (the "Servicer"), hereby
certify that:
 A review
of the activities of the Servicer during the preceding calendar year and of the performance
of the Servicer under the Agreement has been made under my supervision;
and
  To the
best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations
under the Agreement in all material respects throughout such year or a portion thereof,
or, if there has been a failure to fulfill any such obligation in any material
respect, I have specified
below each such failure known to me and the nature and status
thereof.
  Date:  March 12,
2008
  Home Loan
Services, Inc., as Servicer
   By:       
/s/
Steven A. Baranet
 Name:   Steven
A. Baranet
 Title:    
Vice President
        
 Home Loan Services is
      a subsidiary
                  
                  GU-004
      (01-07)of Merrill Lynch Bank
      and Trust Co., FSB