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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
SEPTEMBER 30, 1996, CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
INCOME FOR THE NINE-MONTH PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996, AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND THE FOOTNOTES
THERETO.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                           SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                                         675
<SECURITIES>                                                   150
<RECEIVABLES>                                               30,057
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            32,129
<PP&E>                                                       3,098
<DEPRECIATION>                                               2,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                              46,715
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       34,024
<BONDS>                                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                        25
<OTHER-SE>                                                   1,803
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                46,715
<SALES>                                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                            21,630
<CGS>                                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               20,454
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                             113
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                999
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   481
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                            518
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                                   518
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                  .21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                    0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3438 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3438

 To prohibit the use of funds for the establishment of National Marine 
             Monuments unless certain requirements are met.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             August 1, 2008

 Ms. Landrieu introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit the use of funds for the establishment of National Marine 
             Monuments unless certain requirements are met.

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

SECTION 1. MARINE MONUMENTS.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no 
funds made available under any Act making appropriations for fiscal 
year 2008 or 2009 may be used to establish a national monument or 
otherwise convey protected status to any area in the marine environment 
of the Exclusive Economic Zone of the United States under the Act of 
June 8, 1906 (16 U.S.C. 431 et seq.).
    (b) Study.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 
this Act, the Secretary of Commerce may, as applicable, and in 
compliance with all requirements under title III of the National Marine 
Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.) (including the procedures for 
designation and implementation under section 304 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 
1434)) with respect to any proposed protected area, submit to Congress 
a study of the proposed protected area.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.02***CERTIFICATION BY SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE***     I, Gregory T. Donovan, the Senior Vice President of Accounting and Finance of Campbell &Company, Inc. as managing operator, of The Campbell Fund Trust, certify that (i) the Form 10K forthe year ended December 31, 2007 of The Campbell Fund Trust fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained inthe Form 10K for the year ended December 31, 2007 fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of The Campbell Fund Trust.      THE CAMPBELL FUND TRUST   By:  Campbell & Company, Inc., managing operator       By:       /s/ Gregory T. Donovan    Gregory T. Donovan    Senior Vice President of Accounting and Finance    March 31, 2008   
E 5
STATE v. Dan Horace MATHURIN.

No. 135P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2007.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 14th day of March 2007 by Defendant for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 3rd day of May 2007."
##### Form 10-Q Table of Contents

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 Quarterly Report of Eden Bioscience Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Bradley
S. Powell, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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

Dated: August 6, 2004

| |  |  |                                                                                                      
| |  |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  |  | /s/ Bradley S. PowellBradley S. PowellVice President of Finance, Chief FinancialOfficer and Secretary

---
HONEYCUTT v. HONEYCUTT.

No. COA07-29.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed January 15, 2008.

Certification Date February 4, 2008.

Appeal from Wake (05CVD14562).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
# C_2023024EN.01005701.xml

| 23.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/57

---

Action brought on 12 November 2022 — Everblacks Towage v Commission

(Case T-703/22)

(2023/C 24/79)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Everblacks Towage — Serviços Marítimos, Sociedade Unipessoal, Lda (Zona Franca da Madeira) (Funchal, Portugal) (represented by: A. Ferreira Correia and R. da Palma Borges, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in respect of Articles 1 and 4; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in respect of Articles 1 and 4;

| — | order the defendant institution to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant institution to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action brought against Commission Decision (EU) 2022/1414 of 4 December 2020 on aid scheme SA.21259 (2018/C) (ex 2018/NN) implemented by Portugal for Zona Franca da Madeira (ZFM) — Regime III (notified under document C(2020) 8550) (OJ 2022 L 217, p. 49), the applicant relies on six pleas in law that are, essentially, identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-702/22, TA v Commission.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
     consolidated balance sheet and consolidated statement of operations in the
     Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB as of and for the year ended October
     31, 1997, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
     statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001020448
<NAME>                        Imperial Petroleum Recovery Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             OCT-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                NOV-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                  OCT-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1.000
<CASH>                                             30,498
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                           0
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   62,764
<PP&E>                                            137,614
<DEPRECIATION>                                     29,209
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    210,410
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             722,375
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                           12,568
<OTHER-SE>                                       (813,313)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      210,410
<SALES>                                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        0
<CGS>                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   2,818,599
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 12,759
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,831,358)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,831,358)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   207,086
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,624,272)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.27)
        


</TABLE>
STATE of North Carolina v. Quincy J. HUNT.

No. 192P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 6, 2008.

Amos Granger Tyndall, Chapel Hill, for Hunt.

Robert Curran, Assistant Attorney General, David Saacks, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 24th day of April 2007 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the State of NC, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of March 2008."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 24th day of April 2007 by Defendant 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 6th day of March 2008."
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Milton Wayne Kay v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-13-00595-CR

Trial court case number: D-120519-R

Trial court: 260th District Court of Orange County

This case was abated on December 19, 2013 for the trial court to hold a hearing to 

determine appointment of counsel. We are in receipt of an order from the trial court dated 

December 20, 2013, appointing Christine Brown-Zeto as counsel for appellant. 

Appellant’s brief is already on file with this Court. We hereby reinstate this case on the 

Court’s active docket, and order the State’s brief, if any, to be filed within 30 days of the date of 

this order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(b).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Justice Rebeca Huddle

X Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: January 7, 2014
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-11068

Summary Calendar

____________

Reginald Grant, 

Plaintiff—Appellant,

versus

Amazon.com Services LLC, 

Defendant—Appellee.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:22-CV-439

______________________________

Before Southwick, Willett, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Reginald Grant, proceeding pro se, moves for leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis (IFP) in this appeal of the district court’s dismissal of his case

upon granting summary judgment on the defendant’s motion and sua sponte. 

The motion is a challenge to the district court’s certification that the appeal 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 12, 2024

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-11068 Document: 58-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/12/2024
No. 23-11068

2

is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 

1997).

Grant fails to address the district court’s reasons for the dismissal of 

his complaint. Pro se briefs are afforded liberal construction. See Yohey v. 

Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993). Nevertheless, when an appellant 

fails to identify any error in the district court’s analysis, it is the same as if the 

appellant had not appealed the decision. Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy 

Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).

Because Grant has failed to meaningfully challenge any factual or legal 

aspect of the district court’s disposition of his claims and dismissal of his 

complaint, he has abandoned the critical issue of his appeal. See id. Thus, 

the appeal lacks arguable merit. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th 

Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the motion for leave to proceed IFP is DENIED, 

and the appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 

n.24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Grant is WARNED that filing further frivolous 

appeals may subject him to sanctions. See Fed. R. App. P. 38; Clark v. 

Green, 814 F.2d 221, 223 (5th Cir. 1987).

Case: 23-11068 Document: 58-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/12/2024
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

The U.S. Small Business Administration's Audit and Financial Management Advisory Committee (AFMAC) will meet on September 12, 2005 at 11 a.m. in the Administrator's conference room. The AFMAC was established by the Administrator of the SBA to provide recommendation and advice regarding the Agency's financial management including the financial reporting process, systems of internal controls, audit process and process for monitoring compliance with relevant laws and regulations. 

                    Anyone wishing to attend must contact Thomas Dumaresq in writing or by fax. Thomas Dumaresq, Chief Financial Officer, 409 3rd Street SW., Washington, DC 20416, phone (202)                           ( print page 49966)                        205-6506, fax: (202) 205-6869, e-mail:                     *thomas.dumaresq@sba.gov*.                 

Dated: August 17, 2005. 

Carmen-Rosa Torres, 

Director, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Office of Analysis, Planning and Accountability. 

[FR Doc. 05-16921 Filed 8-24-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
STATE v. PERCHALSKI

No. COA07-1390.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed April 1, 2008.

Certification Date April 21, 2008.

Appeal from the Buncombe (04CRS63455).

Cases Reported Without Published Opinion. Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                         AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                         ALL-AMERICAN SPORTPARK, INC.
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


     I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q of All-American SportPark, Inc. for the period ending September
30, 2008:

     (1) 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of All-
American SportPark, Inc.


Dated: November 14, 2008



/s/ Ronald S. Boreta
Ronald S. Boreta
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) and
Principal Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to All-American SportPark, Inc.
and will be retained by All-American SportPark, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3601 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3601

  To authorize funding for the National Crime Victim Law Institute to 
    provide support for victims of crime under Crime Victims Legal 
   Assistance Programs as a part of the Victims of Crime Act of 1984.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

           September 25 (legislative day, September 17), 2008

  Mr. Kyl (for himself and Mr. Leahy) introduced the following bill; 
  which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize funding for the National Crime Victim Law Institute to 
    provide support for victims of crime under Crime Victims Legal 
   Assistance Programs as a part of the Victims of Crime Act of 1984.

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

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION.

    Section 103(b) of the Justice for All Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-
405; 118 Stat. 2264) is amended in paragraphs (1) through (5) by 
striking ``2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009'' each place it appears and 
inserting ``2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013''.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2023024EN.01008201.xml

| 23.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/82 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/82

---

Action brought on 2 December 2022 — Nieß v EUIPO — Terrasoverkapping-inkoop.nl (GARTENLÜX)

(Case T-754/22)

(2023/C 24/109)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Andrea Nieß (Kempen, Germany) (represented by: A. Erlenhardt, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Terrasoverkapping-inkoop.nl BV (Venlo, Netherlands)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU word mark GARTENLÜX — Application No 18 347 602

Proceedings before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 September 2022 in Case R 607/2022-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision and the decision of the Opposition Division of 9 February 2022; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision and the decision of the Opposition Division of 9 February 2022;

| — | order the intervener to pay the costs, including those incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the intervener to pay the costs, including those incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of the second sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council in conjunction with Article 27 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of the second sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council in conjunction with Article 27 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430;

| — | Infringement of Article 109 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 109 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
STATE v. FREEMAN.

No. COA07-1334.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed June 17, 2008.

Certification Date July 7, 2008.

Appeal from Wayne (07CRS51607).

Case reported without published opinion. Remanded.