alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<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>                                         134,635
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,685,222
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,819,857
<PP&E>                                          86,703
<DEPRECIATION>                                  37,681
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,868,879
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,755,425
<BONDS>                                      4,125,814
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           153
<OTHER-SE>                                 (3,012,207)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,868,879
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               538,917
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  386,519
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,009,652
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (2,034)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (855,220)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (855,220)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (855,220)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 7 A1 26 5 . ERI C BI LLI NGS v . THE STATE.

Eri c Bi l l i n gs p l ed g u i l t y t o fel o n y m urd er an d was s en t en ced t o l i fe

i m p ri s o n m en t

. He fi l ed a m o t io n t o co rrect a v o i d s en t en ce, wh ich t h e t ri al co u rt

d i s m i s s ed . He t h ereaft er fi l ed t h i s d i rect ap p eal

. W e, h o wev er, l ack ju ri s d i ct i o n

. U n d er o u r Co n st i t ut io n , t h e Su p rem e Co u rt h as ap p el l at e ju ri s d i ct i o n o v e r

“ [a] l l cas es i n wh i ch a sen t en ce o f d eat h was i m p os ed or c o u l d b e i m

p o s ed .” Ga.

Co n s t

. of 19 8 3

, A rt

. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III (8 ). Becau s e a p en al t y o f d e a t h can b e

i m p o s ed fo r th e cri m e o f fel o n y m u rd er, ju ri s di ct i o n i s p ro per i n t h e Su p rem e Co u rt

. See OCGA § 1 6

- 5

- 1 ( c )

, ( e ) (1 ); Nea l v. S ta t e , 2 9 0 Ga. 5 6 3, 5 72 (7 2 2 SE2 d 7 6 5 )
(2 0 1 2) (Hu n st ei n , C. J., co n cu rri n g ); s ee al s o S t a t e v. Th o rn t o n , 2 5 3 Ga. 5 2 4, 5 2 4 (1 )
(3 2 2 SE2 d 7 1 1 ) (1 98 4 ) (d i rect i n g t h i s Co urt t o t ran s fer “ a l l cas es i n w h i ch ei t h er a

s en t en ce o f d eat h o r of l i fe i m p ri s o n m en t h as b een i m

p o s ed u p o n co n v ict i o n o f

m u rd er”). Acco rd i n g l y , Bi l l i n g s’ s ap p eal is h ereb y TRANSFERRED t o t he Su p rem e

Co u rt fo r d i s po s it i o n

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t if y t h a t th e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. March 15, 2017

03/15/2017
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3848 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3848

 To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
to add New York to the New England Fishery Management Council, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 10, 2014

  Mr. Bishop of New York (for himself and Mr. Israel) introduced the 
    following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural 
                               Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
to add New York to the New England Fishery Management Council, and for 
                            other purposes.

    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 ``New York Fair Fishing Act''.

SEC. 2. ADDITION OF NEW YORK TO NEW ENGLAND FISHERY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL.

    Section 302(a)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation 
and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1852(a)(1)(A)) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``New York,'' after ``New Hampshire,'';
            (2) by striking ``except'' and inserting ``except New York 
        and except'';
            (3) by striking ``18'' and inserting ``21''; and
            (4) by striking ``12'' and inserting ``14''.
                                 <all>
```
In the Matter of the FORECLOSURE OF THE DEED OF TRUST EXECUTED BY FOX DEN DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Dated May 19, 2004, and Recorded in Book 1621 at Page 1101, Iredell County Registry.

By: Frank C. Thigpen, Attorney for Trustee, Ryan D. Oxendine.

No. COA15-471.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Feb. 2, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

September 26, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Rehearing No. 551 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

133396 Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Justices Petitioner-Appellee, 

v SC: 133396 

 COA: 262500 

Wayne CC: 04-430612-AA,

STATE TAX COMMISSION and 04-430613-AA, 04-430614-AA

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY,

 Respondents-Appellees,

and 

CITY OF DEARBORN,

 Intervening Respondent-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motions for rehearing are considered, and they are 

DENIED.

 WEAVER, CORRIGAN, and MARKMAN, JJ., would grant rehearing and affirm the 

Court of Appeals. 

0923 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 26, 2008 

Clerk
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 ofChapter 63****Of Title 18 of the United States Code**

 

I, Patricia M. Newman, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, inmy capacity as an officer of Westaff, Inc. (the “Company”), that, to thebest of my knowledge;

 

(1)                                  TheQuarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended January 21,2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
| Date:  March 7, 2006 |                                   |
|--------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                           |                                   |
|                           | By:                                    | /s/ Patricia M. Newman |   |
|                           |                                   | Patricia M. Newman |   |
|                           | President and  Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906

 has been provided to Westaff, Inc.and will be retained by Westaff, Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       3,705,392
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,528,691
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (15,879)
<INVENTORY>                                  3,218,280
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,986,903
<PP&E>                                       1,400,647
<DEPRECIATION>                               (676,052)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,611,210
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          676,384
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        34,100
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,696,469
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,611,210
<SALES>                                      2,254,797
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,480,667
<CGS>                                        1,114,465
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,241,477
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (121,103)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  34
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (934,206)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (349,618)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (584,588)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (584,588)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.18)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         144,296
<SECURITIES>                                   175,357
<RECEIVABLES>                                   74,850
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,974
<INVENTORY>                                     19,335
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               445,627
<PP&E>                                          88,349
<DEPRECIATION>                                  52,056
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 496,309
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           78,177
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       323,756
<OTHER-SE>                                      75,036
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   496,309
<SALES>                                        407,648
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               407,648
<CGS>                                          181,891
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  181,891
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               153,803
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,611
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 82,410
<INCOME-TAX>                                    24,723
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             82,410
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     33
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    57,278
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.30


</TABLE>
In the Matter of: S.N. and C.W.

No. COA15-975.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

April 5, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3814 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3814

To amend the Commodity Exchange Act to require the de minimis quantity 
 of swap dealing needed to qualify for exemption from designation as a 
 swap dealer to be changed by a vote of the Commodity Futures Trading 
                              Commission.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 7, 2014

  Mr. Hudson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Commodity Exchange Act to require the de minimis quantity 
 of swap dealing needed to qualify for exemption from designation as a 
 swap dealer to be changed by a vote of the Commodity Futures Trading 
                              Commission.

    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 ``Risk Management Certainty Act''.

SEC. 2. COMMISSION VOTE REQUIRED BEFORE AUTOMATIC CHANGE OF SWAP DEALER 
              DE MINIMIS LEVEL.

    Section 1a(49)(D) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 
1a(49)(D)) is amended to read as follows:
                    ``(D) De minimis exception.--The Commission shall 
                exempt from designation as a swap dealer an entity that 
                engages in a de minimis quantity of swap dealing (which 
                shall not be less than $8,000,000,000) in connection 
                with transactions with or on behalf of its customers. 
                The Commission shall promulgate regulations to 
                establish the factors to be used in a determination to 
                so exempt, including any monetary or other levels 
                established by the Commission, and such levels shall 
                only be amended or changed through an affirmative 
                action of the Commission undertaken by rule or 
                regulation.''.
                                 <all>
```
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-08-299-CR

JOHN ALLAN DARLINGTON	APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

	------------

	FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 5 OF TARRANT COUNTY

	------------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

	------------

	Appellant John Allan Darlington attempts to appeal his conviction and sentence for assault with bodily injury of a family member.  The trial court’s certification of appellant’s right of appeal states that appellant “has waived the right of appeal.”  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). 

	On August 26, 2008, we notified appellant that the certification indicating that he had waived his right to appeal had been filed in this court and that the appeal would be dismissed unless appellant or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a timely response showing grounds for continuing the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d), 44.3.  Appellant has not filed a response.  Therefore, we dismiss this appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d), 43.2(f); Blanco v. State, 18 S.W.3d 218, 220 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000).

								PER CURIAM

PANEL:  LIVINGSTON, DAUPHINOT, and HOLMAN, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED:  September 25, 2008
i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00434-CV

GALLAGHER RANCH HEADQUARTERS RANCH DEVELOPMENT, LTD.,

Appellant

v.

CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, by and through

the City Public Service Board of San Antonio,

Appellee

From the Probate Court No. 1, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2005-ED-0031

Honorable Polly Jackson Spencer, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Alma L. López, Chief Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 17, 2008

MOTION TO DISMISS GRANTED; DISMISSED

Appellant filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. We grant the motion and this appeal is

dismissed with prejudice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). We order all costs assessed against

appellant. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d) (absent agreement of the parties, costs are taxed against

appellant).

PER CURIAM
# CE2004070EN.01023602.xml

| 20.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 70/236 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 70/236

---

(2004/C 70 E/254)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3208/03

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(23 October 2003)

Subject:   School funding crisis in Hillingdon and Barnet

Subject:

John Randall MP and Sydney Chapman MP have approached me about the funding crisis in schools in their respective constituencies in Hillingdon and Barnet. Because of changes to the UK Government's education funding formula, money has been diverted from schools in the Greater London area to the north of England. The Government's increases in employers' national insurance and pension costs have intensified the funding crisis with many schools obliged to lay off teachers, increase class sizes or set deficit budgets. Schools which have been particularly badly affected include Friern Barnet School, Ashmole School and East Barnet Comprehensive.

Could the Commission please state what EU funds are available for schools and whether any of these could be used to avert teacher redundancies forced on schools by the Labour Government's failure to fund schools in the Greater London area properly?

Are there any funds available for repair and rebuilding of schools since many schools have had to use money reserved for capital and repairs to avoid teacher redundancies?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(28 November 2003)

(28 November 2003)

Article 149, paragraph 1, of the EC Treaty clearly defines the respective competencies of the Member States and of the Community in the field of education. The Community supports the development of quality education while fully respecting the responsibility of the Member States for the content of teaching and the organisation of education systems. Community financing, notably in the framework of the Socrates programme, encourages cooperation between Member States, but cannot directly contribute to the operating costs of schools.

Within the framework of the Structural Funds of the European Union, investment costs in the education sector are eligible for support from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) only in the least developed regions of the Community eligible under Objective 1 in accordance with Article 2, paragraph 1, of the ERDF Regulation (1).

1

The European Social Fund on the other hand can support actions throughout the Union in the field of education and training relating to the labour market, human resource development and employment in accordance with Articles 2 and 3 of the ESF Regulation (2).

2

---

(1)  Regulation (CE) no 1783/1999 of 12 July 1999.

1

o

(2)  Regulation (CE) no 1784/1999 of 12 July 1999.

2

o

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Edward Durant HICKS.

No. 232P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 2015.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 6th of July 2015 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 5th of November 2015."
# C_2010024EN.01007101.xml

| 30.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/71 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/71

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 30 November 2009 — Zangerl-Posselt v Commission

(Case F-83/07) (1)

1

(Staff case - Open competition - Candidate not admitted to the practical and oral tests - Qualifications required - Concept of higher education - Age discrimination)

2010/C 24/128

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Brigitte Zangerl-Posselt (Merzig, Germany) (represented by: S. Paulmann, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and B. Eggers, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Annulment of the decision of 18 June 2007 of the selection board of the competition for the establishment of a reserve list for assistants having as their main language German for secretarial duties (AST 1) not to admit the applicant to the practical and oral tests

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay two thirds of those incurred by Ms Zangerl-Posselt; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay two thirds of those incurred by Ms Zangerl-Posselt;

| 3. | Orders Ms Zangerl-Posselt to bear one third of her costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Ms Zangerl-Posselt to bear one third of her costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 235, 6.10.2007, p. 32.

1

---