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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000715369
<NAME> DYCO OIL AND GAS PROGRAM 1983-2 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          54,117
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   37,284
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                91,401
<PP&E>                                      31,383,821
<DEPRECIATION>                              31,205,416
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 354,417
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,803
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     267,248
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   354,417
<SALES>                                        174,820
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               175,842
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  171,597
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,245
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,245
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,245
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.66
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2263 

To extend the suspension of duty on 10′10′ Oxybisphenoxarsine. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 11, 2005 

Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the suspension of duty on 10′10′ 

Oxybisphenoxarsine. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. 10′10′ OXYBISPHENOXARSINE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.02.29 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended 

6 by striking ‘‘12/31/2006’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/2009’’. 

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

8 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

9 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

10 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

DANNY L. SAINTIGNON,

 Petitioner,

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

v. CAUSE NO. 3:16-CV-462 PPS

WARDEN, 

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER

Danny L. Saintignon, a prisoner without a lawyer, has filed a motion to

reconsider the order denying his petition for habeas relief. Considering the timing and

the substance of the motion, I construe it as a motion to alter or amend judgment under

Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). See Obriecht v. Raemisch, 517 F.3d 489, 493 (7th Cir. 2008). “A court

may grant a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment if the movant presents

newly discovered evidence that was not available at the time of trial or if the movant

points to evidence in the record that clearly establishes a manifest error of law or fact.”

Matter of Prince, 85 F.3d 314 (7th Cir. 1996); Deutsch v. Burlington N. R.R. Co., 983 F.2d

741 (7th Cir. 1993).

Saintignon’s habeas petition was dismissed because it was not filed within the

one-year limitations period as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). ECF 26. Saintignon

argues that I should excuse the untimely nature of the petition because his post1
conviction relief counsel did not advise him of the one-year limitations period, which I

construe as an equitable tolling argument. “[A] petitioner is entitled to equitable tolling

only if he shows (1) that he has been pursuing his rights diligently, and (2) that some

extraordinary circumstance stood in his way and prevented timely filing.” Holland v.

Florida, 560 U.S. 631, 649 (2010). However, “a garden variety claim of excusable neglect,

such as a simple miscalculation that leads a lawyer to miss a filing deadline, does not

warrant equitable tolling.” Id. at 651; Carpenter v. Douma, 840 F.3d 867, 872 (7th Cir.

2016). Similarly, the failure of post-conviction relief counsel to advise Saintignon of the

one-year limitations period for federal habeas proceedings does not constitute an

extraordinary circumstance. Therefore, Saintignon has not provided a sufficient basis

for allowing his untimely petition to proceed.

Saintignon also argues that I should reconsider the dismissal because he is

seeking DNA testing to prove that he is actually innocent and because the prosecution

introduced false evidence against him at trial. Though these arguments could excuse

procedural bar or provide a substantive basis for habeas relief, they do not address the

issue of timeliness. In sum, Saintignon has not shown a mistake of law or fact with

respect to my timeliness ruling, nor has he presented newly discovered evidence. 

For these reasons, the court DENIES the motion to reconsider (ECF 26).

SO ORDERED on March 12, 2018.

/s/ Philip P. Simon 

Judge

United States District Court
### 1 NO. 2013

- CI

- 14809

MARY BARRERA § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF §

vs. § BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS § HEB GROCERY COMPANY, L.P. § 45 TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NOTICE OF APPEAL

TO THE COURT:

Plaintiff, Mary Barrera, hereby give notice of h is desire to appeal the

final j udgment signed on February 18, 2015 , by the 45 th Judicial District

Court of Bexar County, Texas, in cause number 201 3- CI

- 14809 , styled

Mary Barrera v. HEB Grocery Company, L.P. Appeal is hereby taken to

either the Fourth Court s of Appeals in Bexar County

, Texas. This notice is

filed by plaintiff, Mary Barrera

.

D ated : March 13, 2015

.
Respectful ly submitted,
/s/Timothy A. Hootman Timothy A. Hootman

, SBN 09965450
2402 Pease St Houston, TX 77003
713.247.9548 713.583.9523 (f)
E- mail: thootman2000@yahoo.com

/s/Brian H. Crockett Brian H. Crockett

, SBN 24074094 10565 Katy Fwy, Ste 400 Houston, TX 77024
713.779.3467
888.779.3237

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT ACCEPTED 04-15-00152-CV FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 3/18/2015 5:23:22 PM KEITH HOTTLE CLERK 04-15-00152-CV

### 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, in accordance with Rule 9.5 of the Texas Rules

of Appellate Procedure, I have served the forgoing document upon the

following attorneys by personal mail, commercial delivery service, fax, or

electronic servi ce:

Norma Herrera

- Worley
B ARTON

, E AST & C ALDWELL

, P.L.L.C. One River Place 700 North St. Mary’s St, Ste 1825 San Antonio, TX 78205

Dated: March 13 , 2015.

/s/Timothy A. Hootman Timothy A. Hootman
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-04-582-CR

WILLIAM FRANK LINGLE	APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

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

	FROM THE 415TH DISTRICT COURT OF PARKER COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	After pleading guilty to felony DWI pursuant to a plea bargain, Appellant William Frank Lingle was convicted of the offense and sentenced to ten years’ confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and a $2,000 fine.  The trial court suspended the confinement and placed Appellant on community supervision for six years.  Almost five years later, the State filed a motion to revoke Appellant’s community supervision.  After a hearing, the trial court revoked Appellant’s community supervision and sentenced him to nine years’ confinement.  Appellant appeals from that judgment.

	Appellant does not challenge the revocation.  Instead, in one point, Appellant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in assessing Appellant’s sentence because, according to Appellant, the trial court appears to have disregarded evidence of Appellant’s learning problems.  A trial court has wide discretion in imposing an appropriate sentence.2  Generally, as long as a sentence is within the range of punishment and has a factual basis in the record, it will not be disturbed on appeal.3

	Appellant does not point to any evidence in the record that shows that the trial court ignored the evidence, and we will not presume that the trial court did so.  We note that the trial court sentenced Appellant to a shorter term of confinement than he originally agreed to serve and that his sentence is within the range of punishment for his offense.  We hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in assessing Appellant’s sentence and overrule his sole point.

	Having overruled Appellant’s sole point, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL F:  DAUPHINOT, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and LIVINGSTON, J.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED:  August 31, 2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1997
<CASH>                                            7824
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   43,893
<ALLOWANCES>                                       953
<INVENTORY>                                     41,882
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               101,742
<PP&E>                                          62,767
<DEPRECIATION>                                  34,993
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 147,155
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           28,280
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           151
<OTHER-SE>                                      56,566
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   147,155
<SALES>                                         37,446
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                47,514
<CGS>                                           22,468
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   43,009
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (78)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (55)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,133
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,450
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,208
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,242
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,242
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .15
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.2.1 (12.31.2014)






AMENDMENT No. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AMENDMENT No. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the “Amendment No. 1”), is entered into as of December 22, 2014 by and between Third Point Reinsurance Ltd., a Bermuda company (the “Company”), and John Berger (the “Executive”).
WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive entered into a certain Employment Agreement dated as of December 22, 2011 (the “Employment Agreement”); and
WHEREAS, in consideration of the mutual agreements set forth below and for other good and valuable consideration given by each party to this Amendment No. 1 to the other, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and Executive agree to amend and restate the Employment Agreement on the terms set forth below;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:
1.    Section 1, Employment Term, of the Employment Agreement shall be amended to read as follows: 
“1. Employment Term. Except for earlier termination as provided for in Section 5
hereof, the Company hereby agrees to employ the Executive, and the Executive hereby agrees to be employed by the Company, subject to the terms and provisions of this Agreement, for the period commencing on December 22, 2014 (the “Effective Date”) and ending on the third anniversary of such date (the “Employment Term”); provided that on the third anniversary of the Effective Date, and on each anniversary of the Effective Date thereafter, the Employment Term shall be extended for an additional year, unless either the Executive or the Company shall have given notice at least 90 days prior to such anniversary not to extend the Employment Term.”
2.     The parties hereto agree that except as specifically set forth in this Amendment No. 1, each and every provision of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect as set forth therein.


[Signature Page Follows]


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement to be executed, and the Executive has hereunto set his hand, in each case effective as of the day and year first above written.
THIRD POINT REINSURANCE LTD.
THIRD POINT REINSURANCE LTD.
By: /s/ Steve Fass    
Name:  Steve Fass 
Title:   Director




By: /s/ Tonya L. Marshall     
Name: Tonya L. Marshall  
Title:   EVP, General Counsel & Secretary


EXECUTIVE
/s/ John Berger
________________________________________ 
John Berger
Exhibit 32.2

DIABETIC TREATMENT CENTERS OF AMERICA, INC.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350

The undersigned, Steven Weldon, in his capacities as Chief Financial Officer and Director, of Diabetic Treatment Centers of America,
Inc. do each hereby certify that the Form 10-KSB of Diabetic Treatment Centers of America, Inc. for the year ended March 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in such Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Diabetic Treatment Centers of America, Inc.

This certification is given by the undersigned solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is subject to the knowledge standard contained therein.

Executed this 14th day of July, 2006.



/s/ Steven WeldonSteven WeldonChief Financial Officer and Director
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1997 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1997

To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to clarify 
the article description relating to certain monochrome glass envelopes, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 28, 2005

 Mr. Manzullo introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to clarify 
the article description relating to certain monochrome glass envelopes, 
                        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. CERTAIN MONOCHROME GLASS ENVELOPES.

    (a) Amendment to Subheading 7011.20.40 of HTSUS.--The article 
description of subheading 7011.20.40 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States is amended to read as follows: ``Monochrome glass 
envelopes, the foregoing certified by the importer as being for actual 
use in automatic data processing machine data or graphic display 
cathode ray tubes''.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Subheading 7011.20.40 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, as amended by 
subsection (a), is redesignated as subheading 7011.20.45.
    (2) Subheading 7011.20.80 of such Schedule is redesignated as 
subheading 7011.20.85.
    (3) Subchapter II of chapter 99 of such Schedule is amended by 
striking heading 9902.70.01.
    (c) Staged Rate Reductions.--Any staged rate reduction of a rate of 
duty proclaimed by the President before the date of the enactment of 
this Act, that--
            (1) would take effect on or after such date of enactment; 
        and
            (2) would, but for the amendment made by subsection (b)(2), 
        apply to subheading 7011.20.80 of the Harmonized Tariff 
        Schedule of the United States,
applies to the corresponding rate of duty set forth in subheading 
7011.20.85 of such Schedule (as added by subsection (b)(2)).
                                 <all>
```
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Food Systems Research Unit: Burlington, VT
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Burlington, Vermont Food Systems Research Unit





- ARS News & Events
- AgResearch Magazine
- Image Gallery
- News

Newsheadline bar   ARS News Articles


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Crop Bioprotection Research: Peoria, IL
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    NCAUR HomepageSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Peoria, Illinois National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research Crop Bioprotection Research People







Mark E Doehring    Biological Science Lab Technician /ARSUserFiles/46461/IMG_8431-small.jpg
 **CONTACT** Phone:(309) 681-6156 Fax: 309-681-6693 Room: 3107  USDA ARS NCAUR 1815 N University Peoria, IL 61604
 **EDUCATION** MS, Biology, Illinois State University BA, Blackburn College


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
# C_2009007EN.01000401.xml

| 13.1.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/4

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5363 — Santander/Bradford & Bingley Assets)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/C 7/04)

On 17 December 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5363. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5363. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
# L_2008239EN.01005501.xml

| 6.9.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 239/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.9.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 239/55

---

Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EC) No 116/2008 of 28 January 2008 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 concerning restrictive measures against Iran

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 35 of 9 February 2008
  )

On page 54, under I.9B.004:

for:

‘goods specified in 9A005, I.9A.002’,

read:

‘goods specified in I.9A.002’.

---