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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS ON PAGES
F-2 THROUGH F-4 OF THE COMPANY'S 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED MAY 31, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-2000
<CASH>                                          88,630
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,145,371
<ALLOWANCES>                                    56,517
<INVENTORY>                                    247,372
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,741,797
<PP&E>                                      12,958,570
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,846,647
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,740,539
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,421,868
<BONDS>                                      1,054,430
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,366,267
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,740,539
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,068,338
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               14,168,728
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              75,580
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                843,547
<INCOME-TAX>                                   333,201
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            510,346
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   510,346
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-05347-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 1 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05347-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 2 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05347-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 3 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05347-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 4 of 4
Exhibit
        32




**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 Xethanol Corporation (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David
      R. Ames, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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.





May 18, 2007
            
            /s/
                David R. AmesDate
            David
              R. Ames





Exhibit
      32 (cont.)




**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 Xethanol Corporation (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gary
      Flicker, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer of the Company,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      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.




May 18, 2007
            
            /s/
                Gary FlickerDate
            Gary
              Flicker
Case 1:07-cv-04518-AKH Document 16 Filed 10/09/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-04518-AKH Document 16 Filed 10/09/2007 Page 2 of 2
William J. Smith (WJS-9I37) 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

IN RE: WORLD TRADE CENTER LOWER 

MANHATTAN DISASTER SITE LITIGATION 21 MC 102 (AKH) 

JESUS QUIZHPI 

NOTICE OF THE 

BROOKFIELD 

V. PARTIES' ADOPTION OF 

AMENDED ANSWER 

TO MASTER 

COMPLAINT 

50 TRINITY, LLC, ET. AL., 

CASE NUMBER: (AKH) 

07 CV 4509 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT Defendants Brookfield Properties OLP Co. 

LLC f/k/a BFP One Liberty Plaza Co. LLC, Brookfield Financial Properties, Inc., 

Brookfield Financial Properties, L.P., Brookfield Properties One WFC Co. LLC f/k/a 

WFP Tower A Co. L.P., Brookfield Properties One WFC G.P. Corp. f/k/a WFP Tower A 

Co. GP Corp., WFP Tower B Co. L.P. and WFP Tower B Co. GP Corp. (collectively the 

"Brookfield Parties"), as and for their responses to the allegations set forth in the 

Complaint by Adoption (Check-Off Complaint) Related to the Master Complaint filed in 

the above referenced action, hereby adopt the Brookfield Parties' Amended Answer to 

Master Complaint, dated October 16, 2007, which was filed in the matter ofln re World 

Trade Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 

WHEREFORE, the Brookfield Parties demand judgment dismissing the above 

captioned action as against each of them, together with their cost and disbursements. 

Case 1:07-cv-04509-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 1 of 2
Dated: New York, New York 

October 18 2007 

Faust, Goetz, Sc~e_nker & Blee, LLP 

am J. Smilt~YW~F~9137) 

ttom&vs for the Brookfield Parties 

~o Ii~ctor Street, 20thFloor 

Ne'PF~York, NY 10006 

'(212) 363-6900 

Case 1:07-cv-04509-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05556-AKH     Document 19      Filed 09/13/2007     Page 1 of 3

Case 1:07-cv-05556-AKH     Document 19      Filed 09/13/2007     Page 2 of 3

Case 1:07-cv-05556-AKH     Document 19      Filed 09/13/2007     Page 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
registrant's December 31, 1995 10-K and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                            2095
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   153874
<ALLOWANCES>                                     14200
<INVENTORY>                                      40552
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  215518
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                          86982
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           124
<OTHER-SE>                                       81103
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    215518
<SALES>                                         107831
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                123040
<CGS>                                            38914
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    51464
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  6505
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                8562
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  13038
<INCOME-TAX>                                      5009
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               8029
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      8029
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.69
        

</TABLE>
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04

- 18

- 00982

- CV
IN RE Reginald NELSON Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Delivered and Filed: January 9, 2019
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED Relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining the trial court has refused to rule on his “Conversion/Civil Theft” claim and issue a default judgment against the defendants. Because relator has not provided this court with a sufficient record, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.
DISCUSSION A trial court clearly abuses its discretion when it fails to rule within a reasonable time on a properly

- presented motion. Safety

- Kleen Corp. v. Garcia , 945 S.W.2d 268, 269 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1997, orig. proceeding). However, a relator has the burden of providing this court with a record sufficient to establish his right to mandamus relief. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 52.7(a)(1) (requ iring

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2018CV06621, styled Reginald Nelson v. Rita Edwards, et al. , pending in the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable David J. Rodriguez presiding.04

- 18

- 00982

- CV

- 2

- relator to file “a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding”). In a case such as this one, a relator has the burden to provide the court of appeals w ith a record showing the motion at issue was properly filed, the trial court was made aware of the motion, and the motion has not been ruled on by the trial court for an unreasonable period of time. See In re Mendoza , 131 S.W.3d 167, 167

- 68 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2004, orig. proceeding). Here, relator has not provided this court with a copy of any motion, a copy of the trial court’s docket, or any proof indicating the trial c ourt is aware of his claims . Because relator did not provide this court with a sufficient record, relator has not shown himself entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied.
PER CURIAM
EXHIBIT 32
         Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act



     CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           OF TIMBERLAND BANCORP, INC.
           PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
Section 1350), each of the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as an
officer of Timberland Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") and in connection with the
Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March
31, 2010 ("Report"), that:

     *   the Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a)
         and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
     *   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
         of the Company as of the dates and for the periods presented in the
         financial statements included in the Report.



/s/ Michael R. Sand                        /s/ Dean J. Brydon
------------------------------             ------------------------------
Michael R. Sand                            Dean J. Brydon
Chief Executive Officer                    Chief Financial Officer

Date: May 6, 2010

                                       49

<PAGE>
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 5 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 5 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 2 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 5 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 3 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 5 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 4 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 5 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 5 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 5 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 6 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 5 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 7 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 5 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 8 of 8
## Breadcrumb

-  Dakota Water Science Center 

#           Software        

-  Home 
-  Science 
-  Data 
-  Maps 
-  Multimedia 
-  Publications 
-  Software 
-  News 
-  Connect 
-  Partners 
-  About 

January 31, 2018

####                 National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Area-Characterization Toolbox              

Dakota Water Science Center
#### Frank M. NEFF, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN; Attorney General of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 13-6188.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 25, 2013.

Decided: April 30, 2013.

*176Frank M. Neff, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Before AGEE and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Frank M. Neff seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Neff has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauper-is, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
Case 1:07-cv-01521-AKH Document 22 Filed 04/01/2008 Page 1 of 3Case 1:07-cv-01521-AKH Document 22 Filed 04/01/2008 Page 2 of 3Case 1:07-cv-01521-AKH Document 22 Filed 04/01/2008 Page 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AT SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND THE STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS OF PNV FOR THE
THREE MONTHS PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       1,096,295
<SECURITIES>                                21,997,041
<RECEIVABLES>                                  855,154
<ALLOWANCES>                                   234,534
<INVENTORY>                                    814,048
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            26,352,870
<PP&E>                                      58,432,047
<DEPRECIATION>                              17,091,633
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              74,071,044
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       12,019,372
<BONDS>                                     71,415,935
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,997
<OTHER-SE>                                  (9,739,082)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                74,071,044
<SALES>                                      5,537,875
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,537,875
<CGS>                                        8,805,321
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,805,321
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            12,996,904
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,458,485
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (18,237,068)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (18,237,068)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (18,237,068)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.14)


</TABLE>
Clear All

        07 April 2022    

                    USS Porter Visits Nassau, The Bahamas                 
                NASSAU, The Bahamas - The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Porter (DDG 78) conducted a scheduled port visit in Nassau, The Bahamas, April 3-7. The ship’s arrival marked the first time a U.S. Navy vessel has visited The Bahamas since the COVID-19 pandemic began.            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

**THE      EXECUTIVE STATES THAT HE HAS FREELY AND VOLUNTARILY **

**ENTERED      INTO THIS AGREEMENT AND THAT HE HAS READ AND **

**UNDERSTOOD      EACH AND EVERY PROVISION THEREOF. THIS AGREEMENT IS**

**EFFECTIVE      UPON THE EXECUTION OF THIS AGREEMENT BY BOTH PARTIES.**

**UNDERSTOOD,      AGREED, AND ACCEPTED:**

| **RAZA              KHAN**         |   | **IEMPOWER.              INC** |
|------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------|
|                               |   |                           |   |
| /s/              Raza Khan         |   | By:                            |  |
|                                    |   |                           | Name:Title: |
|                               |   |                           |   |
| Date:              _______________ |   |                           | Date:              _______________ |

----
No. 85503 

T.,

"UV g Z.OZI 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

CINDY KIRBY, 

Appellant, 

vs. 

HSBC BANK USA. NATIONAL 

ASSOCIATION, AS TuRsTT FOR 

HOMESTAR 2004-6, 

Respondent. 

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL 

This appeal was docketed on October 13, 2022, without 

payment of the requisite filing fee. See NRAP 3(e). That same day, this 

court issued a notice directing appellant to pay the required filing fee or 

demonstrate compliance with NRAP 24 within 7 days. The notice advised 

that failure to comply would result in the dismissal of this appeal. To date, 

appellant has not paid the filing fee or otherwise responded to this court's 

notice. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. See NRAP 3(a)(2). 

It is so O.RDKRED. 

CLERK OF THE SUPREME COTIRT 

ELIZABETH A. BROWN 

BY: 

cc: Hon.. David M. Jones, District Judge 

Law Offices of 'Michael F. Bohn, Ltd. 

'Malcolm Cisneros\ Las Vegas 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

CLERK'S ORDER 

111'1 1447 22-L3LA 2_28
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-50,777-07

IN RE DENNIS WAYNE JACKSON, AKA EDDIE BARTIE, Relator

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

CAUSE NO. W84-71431-V IN THE 292ND DISTRICT COURT

FROM DALLAS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Relator has filed a motion for leave to file a writ of mandamus pursuant to the original

jurisdiction of this Court. In it, he contends that he filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus

in the District Court of Dallas County on March 3, 1988 , that more than 35 days have elapsed, and

that the application has not yet been forwarded to this Court. This Court has received and ruled on

two other habeas applications pertaining to this conviction under writ numbers WR-14,996-01 and

-02, but neither was filed in the trial court on the date specified by Relator.

In these circumstances, additional facts are needed. Respondent, the District Clerk of Dallas

County, is ordered to file a response, which may be made by submitting the record on such habeas
2

corpus application, submitting a copy of a timely filed order which designates issues to be

investigated (see McCree v. Hampton, 824 S.W.2d 578, 579 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992)), or stating that

Relator has not filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus in Dallas County. Should the

response include an order designating issues, proof of the date the district attorney’s office was

served with the habeas application shall also be submitted with the response. This application for

leave to file a writ of mandamus shall be held in abeyance until Respondent has submitted the

appropriate response. Such response shall be submitted within 30 days of the date of this order.

Filed: 05/18/16

Do not publish