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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM APPLICABLE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 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-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           3,790
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   57,925
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,161
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                73,260
<PP&E>                                       1,901,678
<DEPRECIATION>                              (1,192,691)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 807,789
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          132,065
<BONDS>                                        258,317
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,271
<OTHER-SE>                                     273,392
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   807,789
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               314,213
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  554,566
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (301)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              30,645
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (270,123)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (58,945)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (216,103)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (216,103)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (1.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.71)
        

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLAR

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      13,698,676
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               26,225,183
<ALLOWANCES>                                   270,000
<INVENTORY>                                 18,065,900
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            60,775,275
<PP&E>                                      17,741,064
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,096,374
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              70,419,965
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       13,993,755
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,066,639
<OTHER-SE>                                  54,348,071
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                70,419,965
<SALES>                                     71,023,184
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            71,319,494
<CGS>                                       41,839,389
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               62,475,981
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              8,843,513
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,537,400
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,306,113
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,306,113
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.55


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 6



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of CanAlaska Ventures Ltd. (the Company) on Form 20F for the period ended April 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Peter Dasler, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



(1)

the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2)

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









Peter Dasler

Chief Executive Officer
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 vs. Case Nos.: 3:10cr67/RV/EMT

3:14cv28/RV/EMT

FRANCISCO TORRES-RODRIGUEZ 

___________________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the chief magistrate judge’s Report

and Recommendation dated January 13, 2017 (ECF No. 433). The parties have been

furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an

opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section

636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of all timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the timely filed

objections thereto (doc. 441), I have determined that the Report and Recommendation

should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The chief magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence (ECF No. 337) is

DENIED.

Case 3:10-cr-00067-RV-EMT Document 444 Filed 03/02/17 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 2nd day of March, 2017.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No.: 3:10cr67/RV/EMT; 3:14cv28/RV/EMT

Case 3:10-cr-00067-RV-EMT Document 444 Filed 03/02/17 Page 2 of 2
bo&^ lH^[ 'f

Regjna Sophus' Addresses Used At Dviring the Case:

2014:

3643 N. Mac Gregor Way

Houston, TX 77004 #40

2013-2014:

"The Royale Apartments"

9701 Stella Link Rd. #70

Houston, TX 77025

2012-2013:

"New Hope Apartments"

320 Hamilton Street #120

Houston, TX 77002

2011-2012:

"The Polo Club Apartments"

14531 Ella Blvd. #139

Houston, TX 77014

2009-2011:

"Garden City Apartments"

9601 West Montgomery #129

Houston, TX 77088

&-0H4-VO094-C.)/

FILED IN

1ST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

DEC 3.1-2014

CHRISJOPHER A. PRINE

CLERK

tffl UmIU*** •***" "^ ^
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7722
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus AHMED MALACHI ABDEL-AZIZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (7:00-cr-00075-F) Submitted: March 29, 2007 Decided: April 4, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ahmed Malachi Abdel-Aziz, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Dennis M. Duffy, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina; Mary Jude Darrow, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Ahmed Malachi Abdel-Aziz appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to recall the mandate. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Abdel-Aziz , No. 7:00-cr-00075-F (E.D.N.C. Oct. 2, 2006). 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
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

QUICK-MED TECHNOLOGIES INC,

Plaintiff, 

vs. Case No.:1:10-CV-195-SPM/GRJ

DSM NUTRITIONAL PRODUCTS LTD, et al.,

Defendants.

____________________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Pursuant to Plaintiff’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (doc. 6) and Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), this action is hereby dismissed without

prejudice. However, pursuant to Northern District of Florida Local Rule 16.2,

this Court shall retain jurisdiction for a period of sixty (60) days, during which time

any party may move to reopen this matter for good cause shown. 

DONE and ORDERED this fourteenth day of January, 2011.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

LAEL OMAR WRIGHT, 

 Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 3:10cv162/LC/MD

DAVID MORGAN, et al.,

 Defendants.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This civil rights action is before the court upon plaintiff’s notice of voluntary

dismissal (doc. 8). Pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 41(a)(1), this action should be

dismissed.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That this cause be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and the clerk be

directed to close the file.

At Pensacola, Florida, this 3rd day of August, 2010.

/s/ Miles Davis

MILES DAVIS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed

within fourteen days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that

may appear on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only, and does not

control. A copy of objections shall be served upon all other parties. Failure to

object may limit the scope of appellate review of factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. §

636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11 Cir. 1988). th
EXHIBIT 23.1







CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-139464, 333-142642, 333-146216 and 333-147200 on Form S-3 and Nos. 333-145079 and 333-135366 on Form S-8 of our report, dated July 24, 2007, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Oilsands Quest Inc. for the year ended April 30, 2008.








/s/ Pannell Kerr Forster





Registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board as “Smythe Ratcliffe”


INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





Vancouver, Canada


July 29, 2009
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 Enox Biopharma, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, as
the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

     (1)  the Report fully 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 respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.


Date: May 17, 2010                         By: /s/ Itamar David
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Itamar David
                                               Chief Financial Officer
                                               (Principal Financial Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 4:10-CR-63-SPM/WCS-1

NICHOLAS MCCRAY,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

ORDER OF REFERENCE FOR PLEA PROCEEDINGS BEFORE A 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The Court has been informed that the Defendant in the above-styled case

wishes to enter a guilty plea and consents to having the guilty plea proceedings

conducted by a United States Magistrate Judge. Pursuant to the provisions of 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(3) and N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 72.3, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the above-captioned criminal case, be

referred to the Honorable William C. Sherrill, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge,

to conduct all proceedings required by Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal

Procedure incident to a guilty plea and to make a recommendation to the

undersigned concerning acceptance or rejection of the guilty plea.

DONE AND ORDERED this twenty-sixth day of July, 2010.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

JAMES TAYLOR,

Petitioner,

vs. Case No. 5:10cv151/RH/EMT

WARDEN ELLIS, et al.,

Respondents.

_______________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Petitioner commenced this action

by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1). On June 28, 2010, this court entered an order

(Doc. 4) giving Petitioner thirty (30) days in which to notify the court whether he intended to

proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Petitioner failed to comply with an order of

the court; therefore, on August 3, 2010, the court issued an order requiring Petitioner to show cause,

within twenty (20) days, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with an order

of the court (Doc. 5). The time for compliance with the show cause order has now elapsed with no

response from Petitioner.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That this case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for Petitioner’s failure to comply

with an order of the court.

At Pensacola, Florida, this 25th day of August 2010.

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 2 of 2

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within

fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear

on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only. A copy of objections shall be

served upon all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope of appellate review of

factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir.

1988).

Case No: 5:10cv151/RH/EMT
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AP RIL 24, 2013

NO. 03

- 12

- 00190

- CV

Peter Hellmuth Eggert, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE J ONES, JUSTICES GOODW IN AND FIELD

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE JONES

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the record of the court below, and the same being

considered, it is the opinion of this Court that there was no error requiring reversal in the trial

court’s judgment: IT IS THEREFORE considered, adjudged and ordered that the trial court’s

judgment is in all things affirmed. It is FURTHER ordered that the appellant pay all costs

relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below; a nd that this decision be certified

below for observance.
Exhibit 32(a)

TXU CORP.

Certificate Pursuant to Section 906

of Sarbanes  Oxley Act of 2002

CERTIFICATION OF CEO

The undersigned, C. John Wilder, Chairman, President and CEO of TXU Corp. (the Company),
DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:



| | 1. | The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be executed this 1st day of March, 2006.



/s/ C. John WilderName:

C. John WilderTitle:

Chairman, President and CEO


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to TXU Corp. and
will be retained by TXU Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

MITZI LEIGH CROW, 

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 4:10cv357-MP-WCS

WILLIAM TAYLOR, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's Report and

Recommendation. (Doc. 36). The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and

Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title

28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of any

timely filed objections. 

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto

timely filed by the parties, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should

be adopted. 

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows: 

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order. 

2. Defendants’ first motion to dismiss (doc. 32) is DENIED.

3. Defendants’ second motion to dismiss (doc. 34) is GRANTED.

4. Plaintiff's amended complaint (doc. 15) is DISMISSED for failure to exhaust

administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997(e) and for failure to state a claim

upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

DONE and ORDERED this 3rd day of November, 2011.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:10-cv-00357-MP-WCS Document 37 Filed 11/03/11 Page 1 of 1
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable materials, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel, R13 Conference Grant Applications.                    

*Date:*                         November 26, 2007.                    

*Time:*                         8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892. (Virtual Meeting)                    

*Contact Person:*                         Margaret Weidman, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room 3AN18B, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-3663,                         *weidmanma@nigms.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Special Minority Initiatives, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: October 26, 2007.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 07-5443  Filed 11-1-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### STATE v. BLAKNEY

No. 158 PC.

Case below: 32 N.C. App. 399.

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 13 June 1977.