alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
<ARTICLE>      5 
<LEGEND>       THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
               FROM THE ACCOMPANYING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN
               ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000 
       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      JUL-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                         AUG-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                           JAN-31-1998
<CASH>                                   44,501
<SECURITIES>                             52,393
<RECEIVABLES>                            70,647
<ALLOWANCES>                              1,199
<INVENTORY>                              79,134
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        282,663
<PP&E>                                   43,179
<DEPRECIATION>                                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          329,713
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   106,309
<BONDS>                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<COMMON>                                    220
<OTHER-SE>                              218,838
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            329,713
<SALES>                                 112,132
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        130,533
<CGS>                                    49,605
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            63,322
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         24,332  <F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          360
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          27,295
<INCOME-TAX>                              9,416
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       9,416
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                              9,416
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             $0.82
<EPS-DILUTED>                             $0.78
<FN> 
<F1>  EXCLUDES SG&A AS SG&A IS PART OF 5-03(b)(4).
</FN> 
         

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.1
CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Robert Klein, President and Chief Executive Officer of Golden Spirit Mining
Ltd., a Delaware Corporation (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 302
of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

1.      I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended
December 31, 2004 of GOLDEN SPIRIT MINING LTD.;

2.      Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual
report;

3.      Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4.      The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a - 14 and 15d - 14) for the registrant and we have:

        a.      designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
	material information relating to the registrant, including its
	consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
	entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is
	being prepared;

        b.      evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
	controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing
	date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

        c.      presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
	effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
	evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.      The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent function):

        a.      All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
	internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability
	to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
	identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
	internal controls; and

        b.      Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
	other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
	controls; and

6.      The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls
or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent
to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: April 20, 2005


  /s/ Robert Klein
---------------
   Robert Klein
   President and Chief Executive Officer
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

APR 06, 2001

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 99-14419

________________________

D. C. Docket No.95-00114-CV-WLS-1-2

YORK INSURANCE COMPANY,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

WILLIAMS SEAFOOD OF ALBANY, INC.,

WEBB PROPERTIES, INC., and

OXFORD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.

Defendants-Appellants.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Georgia

_________________________

(April 6, 2001)

Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and FLETCHER*, Circuit Judges.

___________________________

*Honorable Betty B. Fletcher, U.S. Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation.
2

WILSON, Circuit Judge:

We now revisit this case upon its return to us from the Georgia Supreme

Court, to which we certified a question of Georgia state law. See York Ins. Co. v.

Williams Seafood of Albany, Inc., 223 F.3d 1253 (11th Cir. 2000).

The facts, briefly, are that York Insurance Company (“York”) issued a

policy of insurance to Williams Seafood of Albany, Inc., Webb Properties, Inc.,

and Oxford Construction Company, Inc. (“Williams”) covering Williams’s

restaurant. Following a flood, the restaurant collapsed into a sinkhole, suffering a

total loss. Williams then filed a claim with York, asking York to cover the loss. 

York denied Williams’s claim because its investigation revealed that the loss was

caused directly or indirectly by the flood, which was an excluded precipitating

event. York next sought from the district court a declaratory judgment that the loss

was not covered. After a bench trial, the district court granted York a declaratory

judgment absolving York of all liability for Williams’s collapsed building loss. 

Williams appealed to this Court.

After hearing oral argument in the case, we determined that the pivotal issue

turned on an unresolved question of Georgia law. We therefore certified to the

Georgia Supreme Court the following question: “Where the ‘exclusions’ section

of an insurance policy excludes coverage for damage resulting directly or
3

indirectly from floods, but the ‘additional coverage - collapse’ section specifically

includes sinkhole collapse damage, does the policy cover damage produced by a

sinkhole collapse that was precipitated by a flood?” York, 223 F.3d at 1256.

The Georgia Supreme Court has answered our certified question; the Court

responded, “we answer the question in the affirmative and hold that the policy

covers damage produced by a sinkhole collapse that was precipitated by a flood.” 

York Ins. Co. v. Williams Seafood of Albany, Inc., Ga., 2001, __ S.E.2d __ (No.

S00Q23003, March 19, 2001). Thus, under Georgia law, York’s insurance policy

covered Williams’s loss. It follows that the district court’s grant of a declaratory

judgment to York absolving York of liability for Williams’s loss was in error. 

Accordingly, we REVERSE the district court’s grant of a declaratory judgment,

and REMAND for further proceedings.

REVERSED and REMANDED.
Llewellen Fernando SMITH, petitioner, v. T. JARVIS, Warden.

No. 17-7482.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

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

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Fulton Bancshares Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending March 31,2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, David W. Cathell, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

 

(2) The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: June 2, 2005 | By:                                           | /s/David W.  Cathell |   |
|--------------------|-----------------------------------------------|----------------------|--------|
|               | David W.  Cathell ,                           |
|               | Acting  President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
Ricky Jovan GRAY, applicant, v. Terence Richard McAULIFFE, Governor of Virginia, et al.

No. 16A707.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 18, 2017.

Application for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to THE CHIEF JUSTICE and by him referred to the Court denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         232,086
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  483,066
<ALLOWANCES>                                    45,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               717,898
<PP&E>                                         408,240
<DEPRECIATION>                                 288,756
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,181,645
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          698,213
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           226
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (118,812)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,181,645
<SALES>                                        320,032
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               334,250
<CGS>                                          151,468
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  766,100
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               170,001
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (601,851)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (601,851)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (601,851)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.32)
        

</TABLE>
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 Quarterly Report of Secured Services, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, King T.
Moore, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 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.

         A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its
staff upon request.

Dated: May 20, 2005

                                                     /s/ KING T. MOORE
                                                     -----------------
                                                     King T. Moore
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
Connie LARABEL, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-7057.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
II-00755

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Janet Hoover <janwhovar@aol.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 11:38 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Janet Hoover

12591 Scandia

Garden Grove, CA 92845
II-01036

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

lance logue <ld161162@hotmail.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 8:54 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

lance logue

1907 dewitt st

Panama City, FL 32401
# C_2014045EN.01000202.xml

| 15.2.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 45/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/2

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 4 December 2013 — European Commission v Council of the European Union

(Case C-117/10) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - State aid - Article 88(1) and (2) EC - Aid granted by the Republic of Poland for the purchase of agricultural land - Competence of the Council of the European Union - Existing aid scheme - Accession of the Republic of Poland to the European Union - Aid granted before accession - Appropriate measures - Two indissolubly connected aid schemes - Change of circumstances - Exceptional circumstances - Economic crisis - Manifest error of assessment - Principle of proportionality)

2014/C 45/03

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, L. Flynn, K. Walkerová and B. Stromsky, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: É. Sitbon and F. Florindo Gijón, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: Republic of Lithuania (represented by D. Kriaučiūnas and L. Liubertaitė, acting as Agents), Hungary (represented by G. Koós, M. Fehér and K. Szíjjártó, acting as Agents), Republic of Poland (represented by M. Szpunar and B. Majczyna, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for annulment — Annulment of Council Decision 2010/10/EC of 20 November 2009 on the granting of a State aid by the authorities of the Republic of Poland for the purchase of agricultural land between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2013 (OJ 2010 L 4, p. 89) — Lack of competence — Misuse of powers — Infringement of the principle of sincere cooperation between Member States and institutions — Manifest error of assessment

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

| 3. | Orders the Republic of Lithuania, Hungary and the Republic of Poland to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Republic of Lithuania, Hungary and the Republic of Poland to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 113, 1.5.2010

1

---
Order entered May 1 5 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 12
- 00696
- CR
GUSTAVO RENE CASTILLO , Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7 Dallas County, Texas Trial Co urt Cause No. F09
- 58463
- Y 

### O RDER On April 10, 2013, this Court ordered the Dallas County District Clerk to file, within fifteen days, a supplemental record containing the Criminal Court Fee Docket Sheet for this case. To date, we have not received the supplemental record, nor have we had any correspondence from the Dallas County District Clerk regarding the status of the supplemental record. According, we ORDER the Dallas County Clerk to file, within TEN DAYS of the date of this order, a supplemental re cord containing the Criminal Court Fee Docket sheet for this case. If the supplemental record is not filed within the time specified, the Court will utilize the available remedies to obtain the supplemental clerk’s record.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copi es of this order, by electronic transmission, to the Honorable Michael Snipes, Presiding Judge, Criminal District Court No. 7; Gary Fitzsimmons,Dallas County District Clerk; the Dallas County District Clerk’s Office, Criminal Records Division; and to coun sel for all parties.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
Danny Joseph FABRICANT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-7130.

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.
Ricardo ALFONSO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-9380.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Willie JEFFERSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7761.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JERREL JAYNES,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 115 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 1st day of June, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Thomas WILSON, petitioner, v. Christopher CALLAHAN, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Kevin Callahan, et al.

No. 17-552.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 5, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
Warren Adam TAYLOR, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA.

No. 17-1131.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.