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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001039314
<NAME> ELW WATER, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1949 Engrossed in House (EH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1949

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To provide for the consideration and submission of site and design 
proposals for the National Liberty Memorial approved for establishment 
                      in the District of Columbia.

    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 ``National Liberty Memorial 
Clarification Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. COMPLIANCE WITH CERTAIN STANDARDS FOR COMMEMORATIVE WORKS IN 
              ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL LIBERTY MEMORIAL.

    Section 2860(c) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2013 (division B of Public Law 112-239; 40 U.S.C. 8903 
note) is amended by striking the period at the end and inserting the 
following: ``, except that, under subsections (a)(2) and (b) of section 
8905, the Secretary of Agriculture, rather than the Secretary of the 
Interior or the Administrator of General Services, shall be responsible 
for the consideration of site and design proposals and the submission 
of such proposals on behalf of the sponsor to the Commission of Fine 
Arts and National Capital Planning Commission.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 16, 2015.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
114th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1949

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To provide for the consideration and submission of site and design 
proposals for the National Liberty Memorial approved for establishment 
                      in the District of Columbia.
```
# C_2009301EN.01000201.xml

| 11.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 301/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 301/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5679 — Boreas Holdings/Centrica Renewable Energy Limited/Glid Wind Farms)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2009/C 301/02

On 4 December 2009, 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:

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

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/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 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5679. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5679. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
Exhibit 32.1



SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS 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)



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), each of the undersigned
officers of RMH Teleservices, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify that:



The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2003 (the Form 10-K) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
information contained in Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Date: January 22, 2004 |  | Signed: |  | /s/ John A. Fellows                                 
|---------------------- |  | ------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|                       |  | Name:   |  | John A. Fellows                                     
|                       |  | Title:  |  | Chief Executive Officer                             
|                       |  |        
|Date: January 22, 2004 |  | Signed: |  | /s/ John R. Schwab                                  
|                       |  | Name:   |  | John R. Schwab                                      
|                       |  | Title:  |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



The foregoing certification is being
furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-K pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulations S-K and 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, accordingly, is not
being filed as part of the Form 10-K.
EXHIBIT 11

                         EARNINGS PER SHARE CALCULATION

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                 For the three months
                                                                    Ended March 31,
                                                            -------------------------------
                                                               1998                1997
                                                            ----------           ----------



<S>                                                         <C>                  <C>       
Net Income....................................              $  458,549           $  445,353
                                                             =========            =========

Basic Weighted Average Shares Outstanding.....               2,259,761            2,508,014

Basic Earnings Per Share......................              $     0.20           $     0.18
                                                             ---------            ---------

Basic Weighted Average Shares Outstanding.....               2,259,761            2,508,014

Potential common stock due to:
                  Stock options...............                 103,387               49,229
                  MSBP........................                  15,011                   --

Diluted weighted average shares outstanding...               2,378,608            2,557,243
                                                             ---------            ---------

Diluted earnings per share....................              $     0.19           $     0.17
                                                             ---------            ---------

</TABLE>


Basic earnings per share of common stock for the three month periods ended March
31, 1998 and March 31, 1997 has been  determined  by dividing net income for the
period by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding, net
of average  unearned  ESOP  shares of 208,864  and  229,144,  respectively,  and
average unearned MSBP shares of 99,175 and 8,111, respectively.
#### In the Matter of Marylynn Cellamare, Appellant, v Steven Lakeman, Respondent.

Submitted April 30, 2007;

decided May 8, 2007

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that no substantial constitutional question is directly involved.
Exhibit 32.1








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 Annual Report of One World Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Corinda Joanne Melton, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Corinda Joanne MeltonCorinda Joanne Melton Principal Executive Officer

Principal Financial Officer

April 14, 2013
Exhibit 99.2

                                   SCHEDULE F

                        Hyperion Telecommunications, Inc.

                Form of Financial Information and Operating Data
               of the Pledged Subsidiaries and the Joint Ventures

Data presented for the quarter ended:  3/31/98

                                    Unaudited
                                                Total
FINANCIAL DATA (dollars in thousands)(a):
Total Revenue                               $   3,830.9
Total Capital Expenditures                  $  14,291.6
Total EBITDA                                $  (1,074.7)

Gross Property, Plant & Equipment           $ 153,071.2


As of March 31, 1998:
Networks in Operation
Route Miles                                       2,875
Fiber Miles                                     130,272
Buildings connected                               1,125
LEC-COs collocated                                   48
Voice Grade Equivalent Circuits                 504,504
Access Lines Sold                                21,473
Access Lines Installed                           14,821

(a)  Financial Data represents 100% of the operations of all entities except
     Hyperion of Florida, which is reflected at Hyperion's ownership in the
     Jacksonville network, which is 20%.
(b)  Statistical Data represents 100% of operating data for all entities.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

PHIL JONES, 

Defendant Below, 

Appellant, 

v. 

STATE OF DELAWARE, 

Plaintiff Below, 

Appellee. 

§ 

§ No. 337, 2015 

§ 

§ 

§ Court Below—Superior Court 

§ of the State of Delaware, 

§ in and for New Castle County, 

§ Cr. ID No. 140601333 

§ 

§ 

§ 

 Submitted: September 11, 2015 

 Decided: September 14, 2015 

ORDER

This 14th day of September 2015, it appears to the Court that, on August 26, 

2015, the Chief Deputy Clerk issued a notice to show cause, by certified mail, 

directing the appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for 

his failure to file an opening brief and appendix on August 14, 2015. The appellant 

has not responded to the notice to show cause within the required ten-day period 

and therefore dismissal of this appeal is deemed to be unopposed. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rules 

3(b)(2) and 29(b), that this appeal is DISMISSED. 

BY THE COURT: 

/s/ Randy J. Holland 

Justice
EXHIBIT 31.1

Certification

I, Kevan Casey, certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this Form 10-QSB of eLinear, 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 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(f) 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,
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.     Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision,
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles;

c.     Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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

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.

Date: September 7, 2004


/s/ Kevan Casey
-------------------------
Kevan Casey, Chief Executive Officer



<PAGE>
# C_2021036EN.01000201.xml

| 2.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 36/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 36/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8851 — BASF/Bayer Divestment Business)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 36/02)

On 30 April 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 (1). 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:

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

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/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 (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8851. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8851. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not pre cedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-11227

IN THE MATTER OF: TLI, INC. Debtor,

TLI, INC., Appellant-Cross-Appellee,

versus

DM LYNN CREDITORS’ TRUSTEE

, Appellee-Cross-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (H-92-CR-19-ALL)

September 14, 1998

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, EMILIO M. GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

This matter is before the court on appeal of a judgment of the district court

relating to an order of the bankruptcy court. Having considered the briefs and

arguments of counsel, and pertinent parts of the record, and finding neither error

nor abuse of discretion, the judgment appealed is AFFIRMED.
#### MITCHELL, Respondent, v. TURNER, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department.

May 8, 1894.)

Action by Sidney Mitchell, Jr., against Benton Turner.

Argued before MAYHAM, P. J., and PUTNAM and HERRICK, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Memorandum by HERRICK, J. (Not for .publication.)
Listen

# U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Releases Performance and Accountability Report for Fiscal Year 2023

November 15, 2023

The Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights for Fiscal Year 2023 reflects the agency’s program and financial performance from October 1, 2022 - September 30, 2023.

Report

-  All News 
-  Commission News 
-  Advisory Committees News 
-  Correspondence 
-  Videos 
-  Archives
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

_________________________________ 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

GUSTAVO HERNANDEZ-LOPEZ, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

No. 17-4087 

(D.C. No. 2:15-CR-00691-DS-1) 

(D. Utah) 

_________________________________ 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

_________________________________ 

Before KELLY, BACHARACH, and MORITZ, Circuit Judges. 

_________________________________ 

After entering into a plea agreement that included an appeal waiver, 

Gustavo Hernandez-Lopez pled guilty to one count of possession of heroin with 

intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). He was sentenced to 

120 months’ imprisonment. 

Despite the appeal waiver, Hernandez-Lopez filed a pro se notice of appeal. 

The government has moved to enforce the appeal waiver. See United States v. Hahn, 

359 F.3d 1315, 1328 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc). In response to the motion to 

 *

 This panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not 

materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 

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. 

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit 

July 31, 2017

Elisabeth A. Shumaker 

Clerk of Court
2 

enforce, Hernandez-Lopez states that he wishes to challenge his conviction and 

sentence based on the ineffective assistance of counsel. We grant the motion to 

enforce and dismiss the appeal. 

“Ineffective assistance of counsel claims should be brought in collateral 

proceedings, not on direct appeal. Such claims brought on direct appeal are 

presumptively dismissible, and virtually all will be dismissed.” United States v.

Galloway, 56 F.3d 1239, 1240 (10th Cir. 1995) (en banc). We address ineffective 

assistance claims on direct appeal only under a narrow set of circumstances, such as 

when the ineffective assistance claim is “fully developed on the record.” United 

States v. Hamilton, 510 F.3d 1209, 1213 (10th Cir. 2007) (internal quotation marks 

omitted). When, as in this case, a defendant “offers no argument supporting a reason 

to depart from our general practice” we will not “do so, especially in light of [the] 

failure to meaningfully argue the claim.” United States v. Porter, 405 F.3d 1136, 

1144 (10th Cir. 2005). 

The motion to enforce is granted, and this appeal is dismissed. 

 Entered for the Court 

 Per Curiam