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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM KOS
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.'S FROM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         4,336
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  7,215
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (238)
<INVENTORY>                                    1,086
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               15,010
<PP&E>                                         18,126
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (7,696)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 26,250
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          17,364
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       180
<OTHER-SE>                                     (53,375)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   26,258
<SALES>                                        36,340
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               36,340
<CGS>                                          5,406
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  87,868
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             3,037
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (54,552)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (54,552)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (54,552)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (3.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (3.06)


</TABLE>
# L_2016160EN.01003401.xml

| 17.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 160/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 160/34

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2016/961

of 26 May 2016

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Conwy Mussels (PDO))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the United Kingdom's application to register the name ‘Conwy Mussels’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the United Kingdom's application to register the name ‘Conwy Mussels’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Conwy Mussels’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Conwy Mussels’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Conwy Mussels’ (PDO) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.7. Fresh fish, molluscs, and crustaceans and products derived therefrom, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 26 May 2016.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 70, 24.2.2016, p. 3.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
Exhibit 4.2


 


 


 


 


 


 


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
FIRM


 


We have issued
our report dated August 6, 2019, with respect to the financial statement of Alaia Market Linked Trust, Series 7-6, comprising the
Defined Preservation 95 Fund, contained in Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-6 (File No. 333-232613)
and related Prospectus. We consent to the use of the aforementioned report in the Registration Statement and Prospectus, and to
the use of our name as it appears under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm”.


 


 


/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


August 6, 2019
Juvenile MALE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-8231.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 18, 2020

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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5053 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5053

    To suspend temporarily the duty on Chlorodimethylacetoacetamide.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 17, 2008

  Mr. Garrett of New Jersey introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To suspend temporarily the duty on Chlorodimethylacetoacetamide.

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

SECTION 1. CHLORODIMETHYLACETOACETAMIDE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.01.00      Chlorodimethylacet  Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         oacetamide (CAS                                                    31/2011
                         No. 5810-11-7)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2924.19.11)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03-0 8 -00398-CR

Et ta M ar ie Jo hn , A ppe lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF B ELL COUNTY , 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 62715 , HO NORAB LE MARTH A J. TRUDO , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N Ap pe lla nt’ s c ourt -a

pp oin te d att or

ne y fi le d a br ie f c on c lud ingthat th e a pp e a l is frivolous and without merit. The brief mee ts the require ments of An de rs v . Ca lif or nia , 386 U.S. 738 (1 9 6 7 ) , b y p r e s e n ti n g a p r o f e s s io n a l e v a lu a ti o n o f th e r e c o r d d e mo n s tr a ti n g w h y th ere are no
ar guable g rounds to be adva nced. Se e als o Pe ns on v . O hio , 4 88 U. S. 7 5 ( 19 88 ); H i g h v . Stat e , 57 3 S. W.2 d 8 07 (T e x. Cr im. Ap p. 19 78 ); Cur riev . S tate , 516 S.W .2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); J ac k so n v . S tate , 48 5 S.W. 2d 55 3 (T e x. Cr im. App . 1 97 2) ; Ga ino us v . S tate , 436 S.W .2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969)
. Appellant rec eived a copy of counse l’s brief a nd was a dvised of her

rig ht to examine the appellate r ecor d and to file a pro se r esponse. Having revie wed the re co rd , co u n s el ’s b ri ef , an d ap p el l an t ’s p ro s e re sponse, we a gree that th e a pp e a l is fr ivo lou s and

wi tho ut m e ri t. We fi nd

no thi ngin t

he re cord th at mig ht a

rgua bly2

support the appe al. See Bled so e v . S tate , 178 S.W .3d 824, 826-27 (Te x . Crim. App. 2005). Counsel’s motion to wit hdrawis gr anted.

The judg ment of convic tion is affirmed.

__________________________________________ Diane M. H enson, Jus tice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Pury ear and He nson Affir med Filed: Apr il 23, 2009 Do No t Pu

bli sh
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-40089

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

BALDEMAR M. GARZA, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-97-CR-266-1

- - - - - - - - - -

Januiary 6, 1999

Before DAVIS, DUHE’, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Baldemar M. Garza appeals the district court’s denial of his

motion to suppress following his conviction for possession with

intent to distribute marijuana. Garza argues that the reaction

of the canine as the tractor-trailer was driving through the

checkpoint was insufficient to establish probable cause. Garza

did not make this argument in the district court. His argument

was fact-based regarding the credibility of Agent Zelmer’s

testimony that the dog alerted to Garza’s vehicle. Once the dog 
No. 98-40089

-2-

positively alerted to the presence of drugs, the agents had

probable cause to search the tractor-trailer and any containers

in it that might contain drugs. See United States v. Ross, 456

U.S. 798, 824-25 (1982); United States v. Seals, 987 F.2d 1102,

1106-07 (5th Cir. 1993); United States v. Dovali-Avila, 895 F.2d

206, 207 (5th Cir. 1990); and United States v. Hernandez, 976

F.2d 929, 930 (5th Cir. 1992). Garza cites no authority for his

argument that the dog's alert alone was insufficient to establish

probable cause. The district court did not commit plain error in

denying Garza’s motion to suppress and admitting the marijuana

seized during the warrantless search of Garza’s truck at the

permanent border patrol checkpoint. United States v. Calverley,

37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc).

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.1

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT

TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of FutureWorld Corp(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the first quarter ended June 30, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Sam Talari, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001, that:

 

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

Dated: August 20, 2014

 

 

/s/ Sam Talari                        

Sam Talari,

Principal Executive Officer
Jody CRANE, Employee, Plaintiff v. BERRY'S CLEAN-UP AND LANDSCAPING, INC., Employer North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company, Carrier, Defendants.

No. 256P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 30, 2005.

Richard M. Lewis, Jeffrey A. Misenheimer, Raleigh, for NC Farm Bureau.

Vickie L. Burge, Ronnie M. Mitchell, Fayetteville, for Jody Crane.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 10th day of May 2005 by Defendant (N.C. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co.) in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 30th day of June 2005."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE NINE
MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH INTERIM CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           1,366
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,991
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     14,381
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,742
<PP&E>                                           3,830
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  32,748
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,148
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              400
<PREFERRED>                                     17,943
<COMMON>                                            11
<OTHER-SE>                                         210
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    32,748
<SALES>                                         25,400
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                25,400
<CGS>                                           11,667
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,085
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 613
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,035
<INCOME-TAX>                                       712
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,323
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,323
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.41<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.38<F1>

<FN>
<F1>EARNINGS PER SHARE IS CALCULATED BASED ON PRO FORMA SHARES OUTSTANDING.  SEE
NOTE 3 OF NOTES TO INTERIM CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</FN>


</TABLE>
DENIED and Opinion Filed June 4, 2024 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-24-00637-CV IN RE SHAWN OLALI, Relator Original Proceeding from the County Criminal Court of Appeals No. 1 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. MC-24-00091 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Reichek, Goldstein, and Kennedy Opinion by Justice Kennedy Before the Court is pro se relato r’s May 28, 2024 petition for writ of mandamus. After a bench tria l, a municipal court found re lator guilty of assault by physical contact and fined relator $500 plus court costs. The Dallas County Criminal Court of Appeals No. 1 affirmed the judgmen t. In this original proceeding, relator asks this Court to do the following: (1) “[ o]rder the judge to vacate the original order” and to “issue a new order that complies with the rules and judicial convention,” (2) “[o]rder th e appellate county court to rule on [relator’s] motion for rehearing or issue mandamus in the absence of the action so that a notice of appeal may be filed and sent to this [C]ourt,” and/or (3) take relator’s mandamus petition–2– “as an appeal by right and have the briefs a nd records in the county court of criminal appeals be taken as the briefs and records in this [C]ourt.” Entitlement to mandamus relief requires re lator to show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion and that rela tor lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. , 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). After reviewing relator’s petiti on and the record before us, we conclude that relator has failed to demonstrate entitlement to the requested relief. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(a).

240637F.P05 /Nancy Kennedy / NANCY KENNEDY JUSTICE
Bennie Jay EATMON; Bennie Jay Eatmon d/b/a/ Bob's Self Service v. TOWN OF BAILEY, Robert Frazier, Mayor, Individually, Shelly Carroll, Commissioner, Individually, Pauline Taybron, Commissioner, Individually, Judy Rodgers, Commissioner, Individually, Frank Taylor, Commissioner, Individually, Becky Smith, Town Clerk, Individually, J.T. Worrell, Chief of Police, Individually, Mark Outerhout, Attorney, John Doe and Jane Doe, Unknown.

No. 653P03.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 5, 2004.

Bennie Jay Eatmon, Pro Se.

Scott C. Hart, New Bern, for Town of Bailey.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 18th day of December 2003 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of February 2004."
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5017 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5017

         To suspend temporarily the duty on Pyrethrum Extract.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 16, 2008

Mrs. Tauscher introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To suspend temporarily the duty on Pyrethrum Extract.

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

SECTION 1. PYRETHRUM EXTRACT.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.01.00      Pyrethrum Extract   Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         (CAS No. 8003-34-                                                  31/2011
                         7) (provided for
                         in subheading
                         1302.14.00)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6121

TERRY SHIPMON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS;

MICHAEL W. MOORE, Director, South Carolina

Department of Corrections; OFFICER QUICK;

OFFICER DUPREE,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

TWO UNKNOWN CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS, Evans

Transportation Unit,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA96-285-4-18BE)

Submitted: May 15, 1997 Decided: May 29, 1997

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Terry Shipmon, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Foster McLeod, GRIGGS,

SPRUILL & HARRIS, Cheraw, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record

and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's

recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm

on the reasoning of the district court. Shipmon v. South Carolina

Dep't of Corr., No. CA-96-285-4-18BE (D.S.C. Jan. 9, 1997). We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
**Exhibit 31.2**

**Certification of Chief Financial OfficerRequired by Rule 13a-14(a) (17 CFR 240.13a-14(a))**

 

I, Terrence C. Kearney, certify that:

 

1.  I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Hospira, Inc. (“Hospira”);

 

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

 

3.  Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of Hospira as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;

 

4.  Hospira’sother certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for Hospira and have:

 

a) Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto Hospira, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluated theeffectiveness of Hospira’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented inthis report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and

 

c) Disclosed in this reportany change in Hospira’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring Hospira’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, Hospira’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and

 

5.  Hospira’s other certifyingofficer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to Hospira’s auditors and the audit andpublic policy committee of Hospira’s board of directors:

 

a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect Hospira’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

b) Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in Hospira’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date:   November 10, 2004 | /s/   Terrence C. Kearney                                                   |   |
|--------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                           | Terrence C. Kearney, Senior Vice President,  Finance and Chief Financial Officer |

 

1

----