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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE UNAUDITED JUNE
30, 2000 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         701,814
<SECURITIES>                                 3,651,739
<RECEIVABLES>                                  772,310
<ALLOWANCES>                                    43,328
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,150,916
<PP&E>                                       2,102,908
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,841,411
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,380,044
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,965,397
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        37,535
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,377,112
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,380,044
<SALES>                                        112,391
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               344,811
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  178,439
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,508
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (728,731)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (728,731)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (728,731)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.21)


</TABLE>
Glen Alan LANGFORD, Jr., petitioner, v. Brigitte AMSBERRY, Superintendent, Eastern Oregon Correctional Institution.

No. 17-7057.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 22, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
# Official Journal C 425A/27 N

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 425A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5727 November 2014 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 425A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5727 November 2014

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Corrigenda |
| 2014/C 425A/01 | Corrigendum to notice of open competition EPSO/AD/293/14 — Administrators (AD 7) in the following fields: 1. Competition law 2. Corporate finance 3. Financial economics 4. Industrial economics 5. Macroeconomics — (Official Journal of the European Union C 376 A of 23 October 2014) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

Corrigenda

2014/C 425A/01

Corrigendum to notice of open competition EPSO/AD/293/14 — Administrators (AD 7) in the following fields: 1. Competition law 2. Corporate finance 3. Financial economics 4. Industrial economics 5. Macroeconomics — (Official Journal of the European Union C 376 A of 23 October 2014)

(Official Journal of the European Union C 376 A of 23 October 2014)

1

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 2014/C 425A/02 | Review of ‘Competition’ C A Official Journals | 4 |

2014/C 425A/02

Review of ‘Competition’ C A Official Journals

4

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Brenda WHITE, petitioner, v. SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN SURGICAL HOSPITAL, et al.

No. 18-7055.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 19, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Michigan denied.
Stephen L. FARRAR, petitioner, v. Colette S. PETERS, Director, Oregon Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 17-9230.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

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

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4685 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to classify certain automatic 

fire sprinkler system retrofits as 15-year property for purposes of depreciation. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 15, 2019 

Mr. PASCRELL (for himself and Mr. KING of New York) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to classify 

certain automatic fire sprinkler system retrofits as 15- 

year property for purposes of depreciation. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘High Rise Fire Sprin5 kler Incentive Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN AUTOMATIC FIRE 

7 SPRINKLER SYSTEM RETROFITS. 

8 (a) TREATMENT AS 15-YEAR PROPERTY.—Section 

9 168(e)(3)(E) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 

10 amended by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of clause (v), by 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4685 IH

1 striking the period at the end of clause (vi) and inserting 

2 ‘‘, and’’, and by adding at the end the following: 

3 ‘‘(vii) any automatic fire sprinkler sys4 tem retrofit property.’’. 

5 (b) APPLICABLE DEPRECIATION METHOD.—Section 

6 168(b)(3) of such Code is amended by adding at the end 

7 the following new subparagraph: 

8 ‘‘(H) Any automatic fire sprinkler system 

9 retrofit property.’’. 

10 (c) ALTERNATIVE SYSTEM.—The table contained in 

11 section 168(g)(3)(B) of such Code is amended by inserting 

12 after the item relating to subparagraph (E)(vi) the fol13 lowing: 

(E)(vii) ............................................................................................ 39 

14 (d) DEFINITION OF AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER

15 SYSTEM RETROFIT PROPERTY.—Section 168(i) of such 

16 Code is amended by adding at the end the following new 

17 paragraph: 

18 ‘‘(20) AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM

19 RETROFIT PROPERTY.—The term ‘automatic fire 

20 sprinkler system retrofit property’ means any sprin21 kler system which— 

22 ‘‘(A) meets the standards of National Fire 

23 Protection Association 13 (or any successor 

24 benchmark), and 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4685 IH

1 ‘‘(B) is installed in a building which— 

2 ‘‘(i) was placed in service before the 

3 date of such installation, and 

4 ‘‘(ii) has an occupiable floor more 

5 than 75 feet above the lowest level of fire 

6 department vehicle access.’’. 

7 (e) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

8 this section shall apply after the date of enactment of this 

9 Act. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Timothy L. BARNES, petitioner, v. MICHIGAN.

No. 18-7860.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Michigan denied.
Randall MATHENA, Warden, petitioner, v. Lee Boyd MALVO.

No. 18-217.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit granted.
Azhar LAL, petitioner, v. B.G. FLORES, et al.

No. 18-8310.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-1997

<CASH>                                    5,248,370
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                             6,789,390
<ALLOWANCES>                                200,000
<INVENTORY>                               1,182,517
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         20,618,884
<PP&E>                                    2,358,482
<DEPRECIATION>                                    0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           31,492,316
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     5,078,057
<BONDS>                                   3,414,992
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                               2,700,000
<COMMON>                                     13,946
<OTHER-SE>                               19,250,838
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             31,492,316
<SALES>                                  13,191,582
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         13,191,582
<CGS>                                    12,333,858
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            12,333,858
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          6,374,863
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          252,674
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (5,769,813)
<INCOME-TAX>                             (1,000,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      (4,769,813)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                             (4,769,813)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (0.59)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (0.59)
        


</TABLE>
Christopher E. LEMON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7447.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 25, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Philip Andra GRIGSBY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7845.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
Christopher A. HALL, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7905.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1364 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1364

  To exclude certain veterans' compensation and pension amounts from 
consideration as adjusted income for purposes of determining the amount 
of rent paid by a family for a dwelling unit assisted under the United 
                      States Housing Act of 1937.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 12, 1999

 Mr. Andrews introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Banking and Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To exclude certain veterans' compensation and pension amounts from 
consideration as adjusted income for purposes of determining the amount 
of rent paid by a family for a dwelling unit assisted under the United 
                      States Housing Act of 1937.

    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 ``Veterans' Equity Act of 1997''.

SEC. 2. EXCLUSION FROM INCOME.

    Notwithstanding section 3 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, 
for purposes of determining the amount of rent paid by a family for 
occupancy of a public housing dwelling unit or a dwelling unit assisted 
under section 8 of such Act, the adjusted income of a family shall not 
be considered to include any amounts received by the family from the 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs as--
            (1) compensation, as defined in section 101(13) of title 
        38, United States Code;
            (2) dependency and indemnity compensation, as defined in 
        section 101(14) of such title; or
            (3) pension, as defined in section 101(15) of such title.
                                 <all>
```
**EXHIBIT 32.1**Certification     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), Stephen S.Schwartz, Chief Executive Officer of Asyst Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”), and Michael Sicuro,Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:     1. The Company’s Quarterly Report for the period ended September 30, 2007, to which thisCertification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Periodic Report”) fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and     2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated:November 8, 2007       /S/ STEPHEN S. SCHWARTZ Stephen S. Schwartz, Ph.D.   /S/ MICHAEL A. SICURO Michael A. Sicuro  Chief Executive Officer   Chief Financial Officer  This certification is not deemed to be “filed” for purposes of section 18 of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. This certification isnot deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 orSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates itby reference.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                     5
<LEGEND>
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                    0000909724
<NAME>                                   The Leather Factory, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                        1
<CURRENCY>                                          US DOLLARS
       
<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                      JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                        SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                              1
<CASH>                                                 213,642
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        2,095,822
<ALLOWANCES>                                            44,000
<INVENTORY>                                          7,254,700
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    10,621,931
<PP&E>                                               2,646,582
<DEPRECIATION>                                       1,738,971
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      16,896,101
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                6,406,884
<BONDS>                                              2,301,994
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                                23,648
<OTHER-SE>                                           8,052,808
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        16,896,101
<SALES>                                             16,811,190
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    16,811,190
<CGS>                                                9,487,408
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        9,487,408
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     751,188
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        (85,781)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            30,377
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   (116,158)
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                          (116,158)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           (0.01)
        


</TABLE>
Curt LOCKETT, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 18-7831.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District denied.
# L_2012173EN.01002501.xml

| 3.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 173/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 173/25

---

DECISION No 42/2012 OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED UNDER THE AGREEMENT ON MUTUAL RECOGNITION BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

of 20 June 2012

related to the listing of a Conformity Assessment Body under the Sectoral Annex on Electromagnetic Compatibility

(2012/351/EU)

THE JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and the United States of America and in particular Articles 7 and 14;

Whereas the Joint Committee is to take a decision to list a Conformity Assessment Body or Bodies under a Sectoral Annex;

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

| 1. | The Conformity Assessment Body in Attachment A is added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies under column ‘EC access to the US market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex on Electromagnetic Compatibility. |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | The specific scope of listing, in terms of products and conformity assessment procedures, of the Conformity Assessment Body indicated in Attachment A has been agreed by the Parties and will be maintained by them.
  This Decision, done in duplicate, shall be signed by representatives of the Joint Committee who are authorised to act on behalf of the Parties for purposes of amending the Agreement. This Decision shall be effective from the date of the later of these signatures. |
| --- | --- |

2.

This Decision, done in duplicate, shall be signed by representatives of the Joint Committee who are authorised to act on behalf of the Parties for purposes of amending the Agreement. This Decision shall be effective from the date of the later of these signatures.

On behalf of the United States of America

James SANFORD

Signed in Washington DC, on 12 June 2012

On behalf of the European Union

Fernando PERREAU DE PINNINCK

Signed in Brussels, on 20 June 2012

---

Attachment A

EC Conformity Assessment Body added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies under column ‘EC access to the US market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex on Electromagnetic Compatibility

| DELTA Dansk Elektronik, Lys & Akustik |
| --- |
| Venlighedsvej 4 |
| 2970 Hørsholm |
| Denmark |

DELTA Dansk Elektronik, Lys & Akustik

Venlighedsvej 4

2970 Hørsholm

Denmark

---
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1268 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1268

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to ensure the integrity of 
 the Social Security trust funds by requiring the Managing Trustee to 
invest such trust funds in marketable obligations of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 24, 1999

Mr. Gary Miller of California introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title II of the Social Security Act to ensure the integrity of 
 the Social Security trust funds by requiring the Managing Trustee to 
invest such trust funds in marketable obligations of the United States.

    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 ``Social Security Investments Act of 
1999''.

SEC. 2. INVESTMENT OF THE FEDERAL OLD-AGE AND SURVIVORS INSURANCE TRUST 
              FUND AND THE FEDERAL DISABILITY INSURANCE TRUST FUND.

    (a) Investment of Social Security Trust Funds Solely in Marketable 
Obligations of the United States.--Section 201(d) of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401(d)) is amended to read as follows:
    ``(d) It shall be the duty of the Managing Trustee to invest such 
portion of the Trust Funds as is not, in his judgment, required to meet 
current withdrawals. Such investments may be made only in marketable 
obligations consisting of interest-bearing obligations of the United 
States or obligations guaranteed as to both principal and interest by 
the United States. For such purpose, such obligations may be acquired 
on original issue at the issue price or by purchase of outstanding 
obligations at the market price.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 201(e) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
401(e)) is amended by striking ``(except public-debt obligations issued 
exclusively to the Trust Funds)''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE; TREATMENT OF CURRENT OBLIGATIONS.

    (a) Effective Date.--The amendments made by section 2 shall apply 
with respect to investments made on or after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
    (b) Treatment of Current Obligations.--As soon as possible after 
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Managing Trustee of the 
Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal 
Disability Insurance Trust Fund shall, in accordance with subsection 
(d) of section 201 of the Social Security Act (as amended by this Act), 
take such actions as are necessary to convert the obligations which are 
held by such Trust Funds as of such date and which are not described in 
such subsection to obligations which are described in such subsection.
                                 <all>
```
Zachary T. FREY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7586.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this 

Memorandum Decision shall not be 

regarded as precedent or cited before any 

court except for the purpose of establishing 

the defense of res judicata, collateral 

estoppel, or the law of the case.

APPELLANT PRO SE: ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:

THOMAS E. LYNCH LOWELL A. SHROYER

Indianapolis, Indiana Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

THOMAS E. LYNCH, )

)

Appellant-Defendant, )

)

vs. ) No. 49A05-1204-PL-162

)

ARTHUR H. HUSER, )

)

Appellee-Plaintiff. )

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT 

The Honorable Theodore M. Sosin, Judge 

The Honorable Burnett Caudill, Magistrate

Cause No. 49D02-1104-PL-15955

September 24, 2012

 

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

KIRSCH, Judge 
2

Thomas E. Lynch appeals from the trial court's order entering judgment in favor of 

Arthur H. Huser.

We affirm.

DISCUSSION AND DECISION

Indiana Appellate Rule 46 (A)(8)(a) provides as follows:

The argument must contain the contentions of the appellant on the issues 

presented, supported by cogent reasoning. Each contention must be supported 

by citations to the authorities, statutes, and the Appendix or parts of the Record 

on Appeal relied on, in accordance with Rule 22.

Here, Appellant has failed to support his argument with cogent reasoning and citation to 

authorities in support of his position. The failure to make a cogent argument is equivalent to 

a failure to file a brief. Bright v. Kuehl, 650 N.E.2d 311, 317 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995). 

Consequently, the issues presented here on appeal are waived, and the decision of the trial 

court is affirmed. 

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., and MAY, J., concur.
MYOUNGCHUL SHIN, et al., petitioners, v. UNI-CAPS, LLC, et al.

No. 17-1628.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

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