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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM DECEMBER 31,
1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          95,019
<SECURITIES>                                   115,034
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,392
<ALLOWANCES>                                       834
<INVENTORY>                                      4,439
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               244,605
<PP&E>                                         244,369
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,245
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 479,160
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           83,054
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           126
<OTHER-SE>                                     307,935
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   479,160
<SALES>                                         21,140
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,140
<CGS>                                           50,354
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   50,354
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               139,212
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   815
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,582
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (183,698)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (183,698)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (183,698)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (2.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (2.02)



</TABLE>
Saundra TAYLOR, petitioner, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SERVICES.

No. 18-8062.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

*1568Petition for writ of certiorari to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT

BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE PHILADELPHIA MASJID, INCORPORATED., RAFIQ KALAM ID-DIN, AND THE PHILADELPHIA MASJID, INCORPORATED.,
Petitioners

v.

GREGORY JONES, AKA SEFULLAH MUHAMMAD, STANLEY INGRAM, AKA SALAAM MUSHIN, ISHAQ SAMAI, WALI BILAL, AKA HARRY MIMS, KHALILAH AZIZ, AKA DONALD ABNEY, RODNEY DUNN, SHAKRI BEYAH, BENJAMIN SULUKI, GILFORD HART, Respondents : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 413 EAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 30th day of December, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED

.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NOVEMBER 15, 2022

NO. 03-18-00277-CV

Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas, Appellant

v.

Duncan Burch, Inc., Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 345TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND KELLY

DISMISSED ON JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL

OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE

This is an appeal from the order signed by the trial court on April 6, 2018. Parties have filed a 

joint motion to dismiss the appeal, and having considered the motion the Court agrees that the 

motion should be granted. Therefore, the Court grants the motion and dismisses the appeal. 

Both parties shall bear all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

<S>                                                              <C>
ANDERSEN ANDERSEN & STRONG, L.C.                                 941 East 3300 South, Suite 220
Certified Public Accountants and Business Consultants Board         Salt Lake City, Utah, 84106

                                                                         Telephone 801-486-0096
                                                                               Fax 801-486-0098
</TABLE>


Board of Directors
Advanced Medical Technologies, Inc.


                                                                  March 12, 2001


We have been engaged to audit the financial statements of the above Company for
the period ended January 31, 2001. We are required to be independent according
to standards ("Standards") established by the American Institute of Certified
Public Accounts and within the meaning of the Securities Acts ("Acts")
administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

With regards to independence, we hereby report that there are no relationships
between our firm and any of our related entities and the above Company and its
related entities that in our professional judgment may reasonably be thought to
bear on independence. We, therefore, confirm that we are independent of the
company with the meaning of the Acts and Standards.



                                                         Sincerely,

                                                         /s/  "L. R. Andersen"



                                       22
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 6595** 

REGINALD C . SWEAT , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,
v. DORRIS COOK, Head Nurse, Individual and Official Capacity; HARRY MCKENN, Dr., Individual and Official Capacity , De fendants

– Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Beaufort
. Henry F. Floyd , District Judge. ( 9:09

- cv - 01255

- HFF )

Submitted : November 18, 2010 Decided: November 30, 2010

Before SHEDD and A GEE , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Reginald C. Sweat, Appellant Pro Se. James E. Parham, Jr., Irmo, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent i n this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Reginald C. Sweat appeals the district court ’ s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. According ly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Sweat v. Cook , No. 9:09

- cv - 01255

- HFF (D.S.C. Apr. 9, 2010). We deny Sweat’s motion to appoint counsel and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately prese nted in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, John R. Weale, certify that:
1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of IPC Holdings, Ltd.;
2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4.     The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
(a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b)  [Omitted in accordance with the guidance of SEC Release No. 33-8238]
(c)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
(d)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;
5.     The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
(a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and
(b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: October 28, 2003 /s/ John R. WealeJohn R. Weale
----

**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 China Valves Technology, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), theundersigned hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge: 

1.     The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

2.     Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this statement this 28th day of March 2010. 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to China Valves Technology, Inc. and will be retained by China Valves Technology, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest. 

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to §18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to beincorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing. 

----
600 59 th Street, Room 4001, Galveston County Justice Center, Galveston, Texas 77551

Ͳ 2388 Phone (409) 766

Ͳ 2424 Fax (409) 766

Ͳ 2292 

## John D. Kinard

DISTRICT CLERK GALVESTON COUNTY, TEXAS

November 13, 2015

First Court of Appeals Christopher A Prine Clerk of Court 301 Fannin 2nd floor Houston TX 77002-2066

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT ON APPEAL

IN RE: Cause No . 15-CV-0627, Styled TriState CareFlight, L.L.C. vs. Lyn Hailey- Filed in 10th District Court of Galveston County, Texas

Dear Clerk:

Please find enclosed a copy of the notice of appeal filed in the above case. This case is assigned to the 1st Court of Appeals, Houston, Texas.

Please note the following information: Date of Appealable Order or Judgment: October 15, 2015 Notice of Appeal: November 13, 2015 Motion for New Trial filed: none filed Request for Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law filed: none filed Trial Judge: Kerry Neves Court Reporter: Gail Jalufka

Request is hereby made that all parties immediately file any de signation of material to be incl uded in the Clerk’s record. Any Motions for Extension of Time to file the record on appeal must be filed directly with the Court of Appeals A copy of this assignment letter is being mailed to all counsel of record. Please file mark the additional copy of this letter and return the same to my office.

Sincerely,

John D. Kinard District Clerk Galveston County, Texas

By: /s/ Linda Scott , Deputy600 59 th Street, Room 4001, Galveston County Justice Center, Galveston, Texas 77551

Ͳ 2388 Phone (409) 766

Ͳ 2424 Fax (409) 766

Ͳ 2292 Copy sent to

Lyn Hailey, Pro Se PO Box 1766 2730 Gillespie Crystal Beach, Tx 77650

Kristine E. McKitrick Attorney for TriState CareFlight, L.L.C. The Fuentes Firm 6046 FM 2920 #426 Spring TX 77379

Gail Jalufka, Court Reporter HAND DELIVERED
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that (1) this Annual Report of Bankrate, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (this Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (2) the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition of the Company as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and its results of operations for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2003.



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



|               |  |                                                  
|-------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------
|March 15, 2004 |  | /s/ Robert J. DeFranco                           
|               |  | Robert J. DeFranco                               
|               |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Demetrius JACKSON, petitioner, v. OHIO.

No. 18-1241.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Cuyahoga County denied.
**EXHIBIT
        8.1**




**LIST
      OF SUBSIDIARIES**




Unless
        otherwise indicated, ADB Systems International Ltd. ("ADB"), or one of its
        subsidiaries, owns 100%, except as otherwise noted, of the outstanding capital
        stock of the following companies:


**Name
                of Subsidiary**
            **Country
                of Incorporation**ADB
                Systemer AS (1)
            NorwayADB
                Systems International Limited
            IrelandADB
                Systems Limited
            EnglandADB
                Systems, Inc.
            USA
                (Delaware)Bid.Com
                USA, Inc.
            USA
                (Florida)Bid.Com
                International Pty. Ltd. (2)
            AustraliaLapis
                Group USA Inc. (2)
            USA
                (Delaware)ADB
                Systems USA, Inc.
            USA
                (Delaware)GE
                Asset Manager LLC(3)
            USA
                (Delaware)




1.   As
      of December 31, 2004, ADB owned 99.4% of the outstanding voting shares of ADB
      Systemer AS. Under Norwegian corporate law, ADB may trigger compulsory
      acquisition of the remaining shares at any time. The remaining shareholders
      each
      have the same right. The value for the shares acquired shall be as agreed,
      failing which the value shall be determined by arbitration.




2.   
Dormant.
      The Company anticipates dissolving these companies in due
      course




3.   
        ADB owns 50% of the membership interest of GE Asset Manager
        LLC.
Azaniah BLANKUMSEE, petitioner, v. MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, et al.

No. 18-8092.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Trevor WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8745.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 25, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION
                         302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT


I, Ronald Xie, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of China NetTV Holdings,
Inc.;

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 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
functions):

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

<PAGE>

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 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 22, 2004


/s/ Ronald Xie
-----------------------
Ronald Xie,
President, CEO & Director
Norberto PIETRI, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 18-5124.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
Lillie LEON, petitioner, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, et al.

No. 18-1025.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Kevin FUNK, petitioner, v. MONTANA.

No. 18-8480.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Montana denied.
Jerry ANDERSON, II, petitioner, v. Rex MILLER, et al.

No. 18-8158.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
NO. 07-05-0178-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TE XAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL D MAY 31, 2005

______________________________ IN RE CH ARLES WA

YNE FAR NSWORTH, RELATOR

_______________________________ Before QUINN, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ. MEMORAND UM OPINION Relator Charles Wayne Farnsworth, proceeding pro se and in fo rma pauperis , seeks a writ of mandamus against Jo Carter, in her capacity as District Clerk of Randall County. Specifically, he requests that Carter be compelled to transmit numerousdocume nts and items to him for preparation of an application for writ of habeas corpus under article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. We deny the petition. Appellant

asserts that by letter dated April 10, 2005, hesought, among other things, documents

and evi dentiary

items from an undisclosed proceeding from Carter. Hisrequest being unanswered, he contends he has no other adequate remedy at law and seeks a w rit of mandamus.2

A court of appeals has the auth ority to issue writs of mandamus against a judge of a district or county

court in the court of appeals's district and all writs necessary to enforce its jurisdiction. Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221(b) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05). In order for a districtclerk to fall within our jurisdictional reach, it must b e establis hed tha t the issuance of the writ of mandamus is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. In re Jose A. Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 69 1, 692-9 3 ( Tex.App.–San Antonio 1998, no pet.). Relator has no t demonstrated that the exercise of our mandamus authority agai nst the Randall County DistrictClerk is

appropri ate to enforce our jurisdiction Consequently, wehave no authority to issue a writ of mandamus against Jo Carter

. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. Don H. Reavis Justice
Tynisa WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. CITY OF CLEVELAND, OHIO.

No. 18-1172.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2019.

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

```

----

Updated May 27, 2011
Exhibit 31.2

Certification

I,
William J. Tamblyn, certify that:

1.I have reviewed this Form 10-K of Ditech Networks, Inc.;

2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

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

4.The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:



5.The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control
over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



|Date: July 10, 2008 |  | /s/WILLIAM J. TAMBLYNWilliam J. Tamblyn Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
|------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks