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

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-27-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-27-1998
<CASH>                                           5,457
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,522
<ALLOWANCES>                                       114
<INVENTORY>                                     16,460
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,561
<PP&E>                                          15,056
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,601
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  36,969
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,356
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,271
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,775
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    36,969
<SALES>                                         96,163
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                96,163
<CGS>                                           80,211
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   80,211
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,719
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 260
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,030
<INCOME-TAX>                                       354
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                676
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       676
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.27
        

</TABLE>
Terry CHRISTENSEN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-461.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 23

                       CONSENT OF LINDSEY, KEYS & SHANNON

The Board of Directors
Thermaire, Inc. dba Thermal Corp.

We consent to the inclusion of our report dated March 1, 1997, with respect to
the balance sheets of Thermaire, Inc. dba Thermal Corp. as of December 31, 1996,
and the related combined statement of income (loss) and statement of cash flows
for the same period ended December 31, 1996, which report appears as Exhibit 99
in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB dated April 11, 1997.


Spring, Texas
April 11, 1997
Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Technology Advisory Committee

Swap Execution Facilities Discussion

Confirmation Requirement under Rule 37.6(b) and Footnote 

195

Cross-Border Concerns

“Embargo” Rule – 43.3(b)(3)

Pre-Trade Clearing Certainty
Darryl Bearnard CURRY, petitioner, v. GEORGIA.

No. 16-6176.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 28, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Georgia denied.
# C_2010148EN.01001002.xml

| 5.6.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 148/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.6.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 148/10

---

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 5 February 2010 — Volker Mergel, Klaus Kampfenkel, Burkart Bill, Andreas Herden v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-80/09 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 7(1)(c) - Refusal to register - Word mark Patentconsult - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)

2010/C 148/16

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellants: Volker Mergel, Klaus Kampfenkel, Burkart Bill, Andreas Herden (represented by: G.P. Friderichs, Rechtsanwalt)

Appellants:

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Schäffner, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 16 December 2008 in Case T-335/07 Mergel and Others v OHIM, by which the Court dismissed the action for annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 June 2007, dismissing the action against the decision of the examiner to refuse the registration of the Community word mark ‘Patentconsult’ for the goods and services within Classes 35, 41 and 42 — Distinctive character of a mark which consists exclusively of signs or indications which may serve, in trade, to designate the characteristics of the goods or services concerned

Mergel and Others

OHIM

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Mergel, Kampfenkel, Bill and Herden to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mergel, Kampfenkel, Bill and Herden to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 90, 18.4.2009.

1

---
APOTEX INC., et al., petitioners, v. AMGEN INC., et al.

No. 16-332.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 12, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
H. Res. 1378 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

September 28, 2010. 

Whereas in 1934, World War I veterans placed a cross memorial on Sunset Rock near Barstow, California, with a 

wooden plaque proclaiming the simple monument honored 

the lives of all who have defended America and freedom; 

Whereas in 2002, Congress declared the Mojave Cross a national memorial, the only such memorial dedicated to the 

war dead of World War I; 

Whereas in 2003, Congress passed legislation to protect the 

Mojave Cross memorial by providing for a land swap that 

would leave the cross on private land, to be maintained 

by the Veterans of Foreign Wars; 

Whereas, on April 28, 2010, the United States Supreme 

Court, in Salazar v. Buono, reversed a Court of Appeals 

judgment that invalidated an effort by Congress to preserve the Mojave Cross memorial through a land transfer 

and remanded the case for further proceedings; and 

Whereas, on May 9, 2010, the Mojave Cross memorial was 

reportedly vandalized and stolen: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) condemns the illegal removal of the Mojave 

Cross memorial by vandals as a repulsive act that is an 
2 

•HRES 1378 EH 

insult to the brave men and women who have served in 

the Armed Forces and who have given their lives to defend the country; and 

(2) urges the National Park Service and Federal 

law enforcement to continue working with the Veterans 

of Foreign Wars to recover the Mojave Cross memorial. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: ALVIN C. WINOGRAD 

DOCKET NUMBER: 159 

DATE: MARCH 2, 1970 

DOCUMENT TYPE: CEASE AND DESIST ORDER 

Docket No. 159 

Name: Alvin C. Winograd 

Effective March 2, 1970 

Effective immediately, respondents Joseph E. Siegel and Alvin C. Winograd 

shall cease and desist from willfully causing, aiding, counseling, commanding or 

inducing respondent The Siegel Trading Co., Inc., to engage in any act or 

practice from which the said firm is directed to cease and desist by this order. 

Done at Washington, D.C. 

March 2, 1970 

Thomas J. Flavin 

Judicial Officer 

For terms of order, see The Siegel Trading Co., Inc. 

LOAD-DATE: June 16, 2008 
Page 2 
Page 3
Kernio DULCIO, petitioner, v. Hilton HALL, Jr., Warden, et al.

No. 16-5982.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 28, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
#### Gurdas SINGH, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-73538.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 4, 2006 *.

Filed Dec. 12, 2006.

Hardeep Singh Rai, Zeena Batliwalla, Rai & Associates, PC, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Cindy S. Ferrier, Esq., Shahira M. Tadross Fax, U.S. De*734partment of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, RYMER and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Gurdas Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision dismissing his appeal from an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal, and request for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for substantial evidence, *Lata v. INS,*204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir.2000), we deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s and IJ’s decisions that Singh failed to establish eligibility for asylum. The record indicates that the police arrested Singh because he sheltered a militant, and was suspected of training militants and participating in a bank robbery. *See Dinu v. Ashcroft,*372 F.3d 1041, 1043-44 (9th Cir.2004) (holding that petitioner is not eligible for asylum where there is evidence of a legitimate prosecutorial purpose, and no direct evidence that persecution was on account of a protected ground). Moreover, any well-founded fear of future persecution Singh might have had was rebutted by the IJ’s individualized analysis of his circumstances in light of current country conditions. *See Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft,*336 F.3d 995, 998-1000 (9th Cir. 2003).

Because Singh failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily failed to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *See Fisher v. INS,*79 F.3d 955, 960-61 (9th Cir.1996) (en banc).

Singh also failed to establish a CAT claim because he did not show that it was more likely than not that he would be tortured if he returned to India. *See Kamalthas v. INS,*251 F.3d 1279, 1283-84 (9th Cir.2001).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Jacqueline SMALLS, petitioner, v. NEW YORK.

No. 16-5985.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 28, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Third Judicial Department denied.
Edward H. FLINT, petitioner, v. KENTUCKY LEGISLATIVE ETHICS COMMISSION.

No. 16-585.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Kentucky denied.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 23

                         Consent of Independent Auditors

Board of Directors
The Bank of Kentucky Financial Corporation
Crestview Hills, Kentucky

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (333-37011 and 333-39322) of The Bank of Kentucky Financial Corporation
of our Report of Independent Auditors, dated January 29, 2002, on the
consolidated balance sheets of The Bank of Kentucky Financial Corporation as of
December 31, 2002 and 2001 and the related consolidated statements of income,
changes in shareholders' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2002, which report is included in Form 10-K of The
Bank of Kentucky Financial Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2002


                                              Crowe, Chizek and Company LLP

March 27, 2003
Louisville, Kentucky
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000745379
<NAME> KENAN TRANSPORT COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           4,604
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,230
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        515
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,913
<PP&E>                                          91,329
<DEPRECIATION>                                  35,255
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  90,917
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,919
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,293
<OTHER-SE>                                      47,572
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    90,917
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                28,481
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   26,450
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   (33)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 138
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,926
<INCOME-TAX>                                       751
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,175
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,175
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .49
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .49
        

</TABLE>
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-23-00111-CV

PRO HEALTH, LLC, Appellant

V.

ELITE JET SOLUTIONS, LLC, Appellee

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 48th District 

Court

of Tarrant County (048-316499-20)

April 18, 2024

Memorandum Opinion by Chief 

Justice Sudderth

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings 

consistent with this opinion.

It is further ordered that Elite Jet Solutions, LLC shall pay all costs of this 

appeal, for which let execution issue. 

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Bonnie Sudderth

 Chief Justice Bonnie Sudderth
EXHIBIT 32.2

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the annual report of Semitool, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Larry A. Viano, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes 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), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods indicated. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Semitool, Inc. and will be retained by Semitool, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 

| Dated: December 12, 2008 |   | By:  | /s/ Larry A. Viano                           |
|--------------------------|--------|-----------|----------------------------------------------|
|                     |   |      | Larry A. Viano                               |
|                     |   |      | *Vice President and Chief Financial Officer* |
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 The Bank of Kentucky Financial Corporation (BKFC) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert W.
Zapp, Chief Executive Officer and President of BKFC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

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

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditions and results of operations
of BKFC.

/s/ Robert W. ZappRobert W. ZappChief Executive Officer and PresidentMarch 11, 2011
EXHIBIT 99.1


                            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 Taylor Investment Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Philip C.
Taylor, 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:

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

     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.



/s/ Philip C. Taylor



Philip C. Taylor
Chief Executive Officer
March 26, 2003




                                       39
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                       ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
                         THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Fortune Diversified Industries,
Inc., an Indiana corporation, (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending
November 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Amy Gallo, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify the following pursuant to Section 18, U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:

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.


Date: January 13, 2006                  By: /s/ Amy Gallo
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Amy Gallo,
                                            Chief Financial Officer
ACCEPTED 03-14-00541-CR 3726634 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS 1/12/2015 10:12:41 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK STATE OF TEXAS



### v. ROBERT TORRES No. 03-14-00541-CR 

### § INTHE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

### § § COURT OF APPEALS 

### § § AT AUSTIN, TEXAS

APPELLANT'S SECOND MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE APPELLANT'S BRIEF TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF SAID COURT: 

### Now comes ROBERT TORRES, Appellant inthe above styled and numbered cause, and moves this Court to grant an extension of time of 45 days to file appellant's brief, pursuantto Rule 38.6 ofthe Texas Rules ofAppellate Procedure, and for good cause shows the following: 1. This case is on appeal from the299TH Judicial District Court ofTravis County, Texas. The case below was styled the 

### State ofTexas v. Robert Torres, numbered D1DC-12-302414. 2. Appellant was convicted ofthe offense ofDriving While IntoxicatedThird Degree Felony, for which he received probation. 3. The brief in this case was originally due on November 12, 2014. Appellantrequested and received a 90 day extension which.was granted andthe due date was extended to January 12, 2015. 14. Appellant requests a 45 day extension oftime from the present date to file the brief. 5. Appellant relies on the following facts as good cause for the requested extension. In additionto thepresent case,the undersigned counsel has been working

on many other cases which have interfered withhis preparation ofthe present case. 6. Inthe present case, counsel will be able to file the briefwithin the next 45 days. Forthis reason, counsel seeks an extension oftime in orderto adequately fulfill his obligations under the 6th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. 

### WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant prays that this Court grant this Motion To Extend Time to File Appellant's Brieffor 45 additional days from the filing ofthis motion, and for such other and furtherreliefas the Court may deem appropriate. Respectfully submitted, Law Office ofJamie Spencer 812 San Antonio Street, Suite 403 Austin, TX 78701 Tele: 512/472-9909 Fax: 512/472-9908 Cell: 512/964-9900 Email: Jamie@austindefense.com

2CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certifythat onJanuary 12, 2015, atrue and correct copy ofthe above · and foregoing document was served by U.S. Mail on the State at the following address: Travis County District Attorney's Office P.O. Box 1748 Austin, TX 78767

3