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

<ARTICLE>               5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET OF BOSTON CELTICS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND ITS
SUBSIDIARIES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND THE RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
INCOME FOR THE SIX MONTH PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          72,690
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                85,297
<PP&E>                                              45
<DEPRECIATION>                                      26
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  86,351
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,783
<BONDS>                                         83,184
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (43,564)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    86,351
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,224
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,383
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,581)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       900
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (8,481)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (2,256)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,736)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (3.88)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.88)
        

</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman,
Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk January 19, 2007 

# Order

January 19, 2007

128034 (62)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, SC: 128034 v COA: 250580 Muskegon CC: 02-047915-FC SANDY SEAN HOLT, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

_____________________________________

On order of the Chief Justice, the stipulated m otion to suspend the briefing schedule is considered and it appear that the motion to expand the r ecord has issued, the time for filing the supplemental br iefs of the parties is exte nded to Februa ry 23, 2007.
Exhibit 32.3
 
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of the Partnership.
 /s/ Gerard H. SweeneyGerard H. SweeneyPresident and Chief Executive Officer
Date: May 8, 2009 
 *
    
    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Brandywine Realty Trust and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.1



Certification
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United Sates Code)





Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Adams Golf, Inc, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify that:
The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 (the "Periodic Report") of the Company 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 the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                    |  | ADAMS GOLF, INC.                     
|------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|                    |  |                                      
|Date:  May 11, 2005 |  | By:/S/ OLIVER G. BREWER III          
|                    |  | Oliver G. Brewer, III                
|                    |  | Chief Executive Officer and President
|                    |  |                                      
|Date:  May 11, 2005 |  | By:/S/ ERIC LOGAN                    
|                    |  | Eric Logan                           
|                    |  | Chief Financial Officer              
|                    |  | (Principal Financial Officer)        





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Act and is not being filed as part of the Periodic Report or as a separate disclosure document
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Adams Golf, Inc. and will be retained by Adams Golf, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### STATE v. WILLIE MAE ALSTON.

(Filed 8 October, 1952.)

Appeal by defendant from *Stevens, J.,*at July Term, 1952, of Lee.

Criminal accusation against Willie Mae Alston. At the conclusion of her testimony, given as a witness on behalf of her husband, Aaron Alston, in a case pending against him, the trial court pronounced the following-judgment : “Upon Willie Mae Alston’s own testimony, the Court directs a verdict of guilty of possession of 79 jars of liquor for the purpose of sale, against Willie Mae Alston and a verdict of not guilty as to Aaron Alston. Willie Mae Alston is sentenced to Woman’s Prison 404 for a term of two years.”

From judgment so pronounced, Willie Mae Alston appealed.

*Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorney-General Bruton for the State.*

*H. F. Seawell, Jr., and J. W. IJoyle for defendant, appellant.*

Pee Cueiam..

The record indicates that the judgment was pronounced and entered without warrant or indictment, or waiver thereof (Gr.S. 15-140), and without arraignment, plea, or the intervention of a jury. It necessarily follows, then, that the judgment is void. This is conceded by the State. The judgment will be vacated and set aside. Of course, the Solicitor may send a bill, if so advised.

Eeversed.
Exhibit 12(a).3

 

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 annualreport on Form 20-F of M-Systems Flash Disk Pioneers Limited (the "Company")for the period ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, RonitMaor, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of his knowledge and belief: 

 

(1)  the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and 

 

(2)  the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

 

By: /s/ RonitMaor   

Ronit Maor,

Chief FinancialOfficer

M-Systems FlashDisk Pioneers Ltd. 

Dated June 30th, 2003

  

 

____(1)____
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 filing by Hong Kong Winalite Group, Inc. (the “Company”) of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009, 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 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 result of operations of the Company.




Dated: March 22, 2010




/s/ Ge Wen

Ge Wen

Chief Financial Officer
NUMBER 13-09-00311-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

______________________________________________________________

OSCAR FLORES, Appellant,

v.

DAIMLER CHRYSLER FINANCIAL 

SERVICES AMERICAS LLC., ET AL., Appellees. 

_____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Oscar Flores, attempted to perfect an appeal from orders entered by the

County Court at Law No. 5 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CL-08-0038-E. The

orders were signed on April 8, 2009, and appellant filed a notice of appeal on May 8, 2009.
2

On June 19, 2009, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared the

notice of appeal was not timely filed. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not

corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court’s letter, the appeal would

be dismissed. Thereafter, appellant filed a motion to realign the parties and change style

of case, requesting this appeal now be considered a petition for writ of mandamus.

Appellant has not responded to this Court’s defect letter concerning the timeliness of the

appeal.

Contemporaneous with the filing of appellant’s motion to realign the parties and

change style of case, appellant filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus under this cause

number, 13-09-00311-CV. Appellant’s motion to realign the parties and thereby change

style of case is DENIED. The Petition for Writ of Mandamus filed under this cause

number, 13-09-00311-CV is hereby transferred to cause number 13-09-00488-CV.

Appellant is responsible for paying fees for the filing of the Petition for Writ of Mandamus

in cause number 13-09-00488-CV.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant’s

failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant’s failure to respond to this Court’s notice,

is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly,

the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P.

42.3(a)(c).

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this 25th day of August, 2009.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

      SUBSIDIARIES OF CAMBRIDGE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS (MASSACHUSETTS), INC.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Name of Subsidiary                                                      Jurisdiction of Incorporation
------------------                                                      -----------------------------
<S>                                                                     <C>
Cambridge Technology Partners Scandinavia AB                                     Sweden

Cambridge Technology Partners (United Kingdom), Inc.                             Delaware

Cambridge Technology Partners (Benelux), Inc.                                    Delaware

Cambridge Technology Partners Securities Corporation                             Massachusetts

Cambridge Technology Partners International, Inc.                                Delaware

Cambridge Technology Partners (Benelux), B.V.                                    The Netherlands

Cambridge Technology Partners Cambridge Management Consulting, Inc.              California

The Systems Consulting Group, Inc.                                               Florida

Cambridge Technology Partners (Latin America)                                    Delaware

NatSoft S.A.                                                                     Switzerland

Cambridge Technology Partners - Enterprise Resource Solutions, Inc.              California
</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4160 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4160

 To amend title 40, United States Code, to grant the Supreme Court of 
   the United States security-related authorities equivalent to the 
                  legislative and executive branches.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 5, 2022

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 40, United States Code, to grant the Supreme Court of 
   the United States security-related authorities equivalent to the 
                  legislative and executive branches.

    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 ``Supreme Court Police Parity Act of 
2022''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO PROTECT FAMILY MEMBERS.

    Section 6121(a)(2) of title 40, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' at the end;
            (2) in subparagraph (B), by adding ``and'' after the 
        semicolon; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(C) any member of the immediate family of the 
                Chief Justice, any Associate Justice, or any officer of 
                the Supreme Court if the Marshal determines such 
                protection is necessary.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3980

Cummins Allison Corp:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
Opinion issued March 14, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-18-00643-CV

———————————

TERRY BUCHALA, Appellant

V.

AUSTIN COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE AND ALL STAR WRECKER, 

Appellees

On Appeal from the County Court at Law

Austin County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 17CV-5488

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Terry Buchala, has neither established indigence nor paid, or made

arrangements to pay, the fee for preparing the clerk’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P.

37.3(b). After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, appellant did 

not adequately respond. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b). Accordingly, we 
2

dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. We dismiss any pending motions as 

moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Goodman and Countiss.
Exhibit
      32.2








**Certification
      of Acting co-CFOs 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 on Form 10-Q of GAMCO Investors, Inc.
      (the
“Company”) for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Diane
      M.
      LaPointe and Kieran Caterina, as Acting Co-Chief Financial Officers of the
      Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of their
      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.








/s/
                Diane M. LaPointe
            /s/
                Kieran CaterinaName:
                Diane M. LaPointe
            Name:
                Kieran CaterinaTitle:   Acting
                Co-Chief Financial Officer
            Title:   Acting
                Co-Chief Financial OfficerDate:   November
                9, 2007
            Date:   November
                9, 2007





This
      certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
      of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act
      of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6962

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DANIEL THOMAS HERSL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. 

Catherine C. Blake, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cr-00106-CCB-3; 1:20-cv-03213-CCB)

Submitted: December 16, 2021 Decided: December 20, 2021

Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Daniel Thomas Hersl, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Daniel Thomas Hersl seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motions 

(1) to rescind an extension of time granted to the Government to file a response, (2) to 

compel the U.S. Attorney to sign the Government’s opposition, (3) to disqualify the 

Government’s counsel, and (4) to appoint counsel. This court may exercise jurisdiction 

only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 

U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 

545-46 (1949). The order Hersl seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable 

interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of 

jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual 

Balance in 

75th Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual 

Balance in 75th 

Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual 

Balance in 

75th Year

-2.00% -4.34% 0.23% 0.20% -1.77% -4.14%

Summary Measures and Graphs

Category of Change: Payroll Taxes (including maximum taxable)

Proposed Provision: Apply 4 percent payroll tax rate on earnings over $400,000 in 2017, with the 

$400,000 threshold wage-indexed after 2017. Give proportional benefit credit for additional earnings in 

AIME for benefit computation.

Present Law Change From Present Law in Results with this provision

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

2009 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2069 2079

Percent

Year

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

Cost rates with this provision

Income rates under present law

Income rates with this provision

Cost rates under present law

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

2009 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2069 2079

Percent

Year

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

(assets as a percentage of annual expenditures)

Present law With this provision

Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2009 Trustees Report Office of the Chief Actuary, Social Security

May 14, 2010

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

2009 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2069 2079

Percent

Year

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

Cost rates with this provision

Income rates under present law

Income rates with this provision

Cost rates under present law

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

2009 2019 2029 2039 2049 2059 2069 2079

Percent

Year

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

(assets as a percentage of annual expenditures)

Present law With this provision