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

<ARTICLE>5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF 3DX TECHNOLOGIES INC., INCLUDED IN ITS
ANNUAL  REPORT  ON  FORM  10-K  FOR  THE  YEAR  ENDED  DECEMBER 31, 1998  AND IS
QUALIFIED   IN  ITS   ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO  SUCH  CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1
       
<S>                                <C>   
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                      JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                        DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                1,447,756  
<SECURITIES>                                  0  
<RECEIVABLES>                         1,039,331  
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0  
<INVENTORY>                                   0  
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      2,570,979  
<PP&E>                               40,122,967  
<DEPRECIATION>                       29,256,556  
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       13,501,161  
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 1,769,856  
<BONDS>                                       0  
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0  
<PREFERRED>                                   0  
<COMMON>                                 93,792  
<OTHER-SE>                           10,437,513  
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         13,501,161  
<SALES>                               4,544,690  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      4,598,674  
<CGS>                                   731,749  
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        14,187,216  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              0  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0  
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            0  
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      (9,588,542) 
<INCOME-TAX>                                  0  
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  (9,588,542) 
<DISCONTINUED>                                0  
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0  
<CHANGES>                                     0  
<NET-INCOME>                         (9,588,542) 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             (1.15) 
<EPS-DILUTED>                             (1.15) 
                                                 
                                  













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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000915767
<NAME>                        THE HELICON GROUP, L.P.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                    DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                                5,751
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                           796
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      7,507
<PP&E>                                               71,782
<DEPRECIATION>                                       42,895
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       58,146
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 5,953
<BONDS>                                             124,382
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                            (72,596)
<OTHER-SE>                                                0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         58,146
<SALES>                                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     38,060
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        29,916
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   13,497
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      (5,142)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  (5,142)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                          (5,142)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                             0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             0



</TABLE>
|                                       |         |                   |
|--------------------------------------------|--------------|------------------------|
|                                       |         | Exhibit 21.1           |
|                                       |         |                   |
| Subsidiaries                               |
|                                       |         |                   |
| Name of Subsidiary                         |    | State of Incorporation |
|                                       |         |
| D&D Oil Co., Inc.                      |    | Georgia                |
| Shop-A-Snak Food Mart, Inc. |    | Delaware               |
| Angler’s Mini-Mart, Inc.             |         | South Carolina         |
| Coastal Petroleum Company, Inc.            |         | South Carolina         |
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

               CERTIFICATION BY THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF
                          SIGMATRON INTERNATIONAL, INC.
              PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) UNDER THE EXCHANGE ACT AND
         SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

      I, Gary R. Fairhead, am President and Chief Executive Officer of SigmaTron
International, Inc. (the "Company").

      This certification is being furnished pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act") and 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in
connection with the filing of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended April 30, 2004 (the "Report").

      I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge:

      (a)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78 m(a) or 78o(d)); and

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

Date: July 20, 2004

                                       /s/ Gary R. Fairhead
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Gary R. Fairhead
                                       President and Chief Executive Officer of
                                       SigmaTron International, Inc.
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 455

To authorize the Secretary of the Army to carry out a 5-year demonstration

program to determine the effectiveness of technology to remedy contaminated sediments in river beds, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 9, 1995

Mr. TRAFICANT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of the Army to carry out a

5-year demonstration program to determine the effectiveness of technology to remedy contaminated sediments

in river beds, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Mahoning River Clean5 up Act’’.
2

•HR 455 IH

1 SEC. 2. STUDY OF MAHONING RIVER.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Army is au3 thorized to undertake a study to assess the environmental

4 condition of the Mahoning River in northeast Ohio and

5 western Pennsylvania to determine the extent of environ6 mental degradation caused by industrial pollution.

7 (b) SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS.—The study under

8 this section shall include an analysis of water and sedi9 ment quality and an analysis of the natural resources in

10 the area. The study shall identify the pollutants that ex11 ceed water or sediment quality standards and shall iden12 tify the point and nonpoint sources of the pollutants.

13 (c) REPORT.—At the conclusion of the study author14 ized by subsection (a), the Secretary of the Army shall

15 submit to Congress a report on the results of the study,

16 together with a comprehensive protection plan rec17 ommending specific actions to restore and maintain the

18 chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the

19 Mahoning River. The plan shall include a schedule for im20 plementing recommended actions.

21 SEC. 3. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

22 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Army is au23 thorized to carry out a 5-year demonstration program to

24 determine the effectiveness of promising technologies to

25 remedy contaminated sediments in river beds.
3

•HR 455 IH

1 (b) SELECTION OF LOCATION.—In selecting the loca2 tion for conducting the demonstration program under this

3 section, priority consideration shall be given to the areas

4 of northeast Ohio and western Pennsylvania.

5 SEC. 4. FUNDING.

6 There is authorized to be appropriated $10,000,000

7 for each of the fiscal years 1995 through 1999 to carry

8 out the demonstration program authorized by section 3.

Æ
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Bedford James HERN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 72-1353.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Nov. 9, 1972.

Mobley M. Milam (argued), San Diego, Cal., for defendant-appellant.

James W. Meyers, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Stephen G. Nelson, Douglas G. Hendricks, Asst. U. S. Attys., Harry D. Steward, U. S. Atty., San Diego, Cal., James L. Browning, Jr., U. S. Atty., Brian B. Denton, Asst. U. S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before HAMLEY and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges, and POWELL, District Judge.*

*

 Honorable Charles L. Powell, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Washington, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to Count 2 of the indictment charging him with unlawful transportation of heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. 174, committed on April 18, 1971. Count 1 was dismissed. He was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment. Appellant’s two contentions are that the statute was beyond the power of Congress to enact and the refusal to name the informant deprived him of due process. In the context of this case neither contention is supported by the authorities and both are rejected. We affirm.

*690Appellant was sentenced on August 30, 1971. He now argues he should have been sentenced under the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention -and Control Act of 1970, P.L. 91-513, 84 Stat. 1236, the effective date of which was May 1, 1971.

Appellant may make any motion he deems appropriate in the district court under Rule 35 F.R.Cr.P. for reduction or modification of sentence. See: United States v. Pregerson, 448 F.2d 404, 409 (9 Cir. 1971); United States v. Stephens, 449 F.2d 103, 105, 106 (9 Cir. 1971); United States v. Fiotto, 454 F.2d 252, 255 (2 Cir. 1972); United States v. McGarr, 461 F.2d 1, 3, 4, 5 (7 Cir. 1972); United States v. Winston, No. 72-1500 (9 Cir. 1972).

Affirmed. Mandate will issue forthwith.
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------

                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Levcor International,
Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Robert A. Levinson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to section 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; 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:   November 9, 2006
         ----------------


By: /s/ ROBERT A. LEVINSON
    ------------------------------
    Robert A. Levinson
    Chief Executive Officer



                                    Page 50
No. 12,984.

#### The State of Louisiana vs. Albert Tate.

The *proces ■verbal*of the finding of a coroner’s jury is competent evidence to show the fact of a homicide having been committed, but the recitals of fact therein contained can not go to the jury. They are objectionable as hearsay testimony.

A PPEAL from the Twentieth Judicial District Court for the Parish Cl of Ascension. Guión, *J.*

*M. J.*Cunningham, Attorney General, and *G. A. Gondran.*District Attorney, for Plaintiff, Appellee.

*John Maries*for Defendant, Appellant.

Submitted on briefs December 10, 1898.

Opinion handed down December 19, 1898.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Watkins, J.

The defendant prosecutes this appeal from a verdiet convicting him of the crime of murder, and a sentence to the extreme penalty of the law, relying upon a single bill of exceptions which presents the question of the admissibility of a *proces verbal*oj the coroner’s inquest for the purpose of establishing the fact of the death of the deceased.

The bill of exceptions relates that the State offered the- *proces verbal*of the finding oi the coroner’s jury for the purpose of proving *1184the fact of the death of the deceased, whereupon counsel for the defendant objected to its introduction on the ground that it contained an assertion that deceased came to her death by means of the shot fired by the accused, and that same was inadmissible as hearsay evidence.

The trial judge assigns as his reasons for overruling the objection and admitting the evidence that he stated to the jury that the inquest proceedings served no other purpose than to establish the fact of the death of the person alleged to have been slain, and he instructed the jury that they should disregard all other statements that it might contain.

And he further states that, “in point of fact, however, the inquest was not read to the jury at any stage of the trial, and what it contained could not have influenced their verdict.”

We are of opinion that the *proces verbal*of the finding of a •coroner’s jury is competent evidence tending to establish the fact of a homicide, and that other recitals therein contained could not have possibly exercised any influence on che jury prejudicial to the accused, if same was neither exhibited to them nor read in their hearing.

A motion for new trial on the sole ground that the verdict is contrary to law and evidence presents merely a question of fact of which this court can take no cognizance.

Judgment affirmed.

Nici-iolls, C. J., -absent-.
**Exhibit 32.2**

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES - OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with theAnnual Report of Protection One, Inc. and Protection One Alarm Monitoring, Inc.(the “Companies”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2006  (the “Report”), which this certificationaccompanies, I, Darius G. Nevin, in my capacity as Executive Vice President andChief Financial Officer of the Companies, certify that to the best of myknowledge the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) orSection 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Companies.

 
| Date: March 16, 2007 | /s/     Darius  G. Nevin                                                                      |   |
|----------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                 | Darius G. Nevin                                                                                                        |   |
|                 | Executive Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer, Protection One, Inc. and Protection  One Alarm Monitoring, Inc. |

 

 

The foregoingcertification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes– Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Companies as part ofthe Report or as a separate disclosure document for purposes of Section 18 orany other provision of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

----
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 160 (Monday, August 18, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48207-48208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18998]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No: ER08-54-006]


ISO New England, Inc.; Notice of Filing

August 8, 2008.
    Take notice that on August 5, 2008, ISO New England, Inc. and the 
New England Power Pool submitted a transmittal letter and tariff sheets 
revising Market Rule 1, on August 7, 2008, a filing was submitted 
clarifying the transmittal letter.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. 
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of 
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ca8c8f988985a4a6a3a4af99bfbabaa5b8be8aacafb8a9e4ada5bc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3a7c7f687975545653545f694f4a4a55484e7a5c5f4859145d554c">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

[[Page 48208]]

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 26, 2008.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-18998 Filed 8-15-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 32.1
                                                                    ------------


                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Levcor
     International, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended
     September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
     Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert A. Levinson,
     Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to section
     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; 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: November 9, 2004
       ----------------



By: /s/ ROBERT A. LEVINSON
    -----------------------
    Robert A. Levinson
    Chief Executive Officer

                                  Page 30
Exhibit 32.1

DSP GROUP, INC.

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the annual report of DSP Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Ofer Elyakim, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18,
Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for
the periods indicated.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This Certification has not been,
and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Date: March 16, 2010



/s/ Ofer ElyakimOfer Elyakim Chief
Executive Officer
18521.

#### Refrigeration-Appliances, Inc. *v.*Atlanta Provision Co. *et al.*

Hawkins, Justice.

This case involves a distribution of money arising from the sale of property under a receivership proceeding, and the exception is to a judgment of the trial court holding that the intervenor, Refrigeration-Appliances, Inc., was not entitled to first priority to the funds from the sale of the property covered by a retention-title contract held by Refrigeration-Appliances, Inc. The case as originally brought was one in equity seeking the appointment of a receiver, to which there is no objection, nor is there any complaint as to anything he has done. The case now before us does not involve any equitable relief, or the application of any rule of equitable procedure. The question in issue is one of law, and is not such as to confer jurisdiction upon the Supreme Court. Accordingly, it is transferred to the Court of Appeals. Code (Am-.) § 2-3704; *Williams*v. *Russell,*207 *Ga.*220 (60 S. E. 2d 243); *476*Burkhalter*v. *Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co.,*170 *Ga.*237 (152 S. E. 98); *Jackson Electric Membership Corp.*v. *Echols,*207 *Ga,*707 (63 S. E. 2d 900); *Standard Accident Ins. Co.*v. *Fowler,*204 *Ga.*861 (51 S. E. 2d 847).

Argued March 9, 1954

Decided March 9, 1954.

*Haas, Holland & Blackshear, Joseph F. Haas,*for plaintiff in error.

*Troutman, Sams, Schroder & Lockerman, D. W. Rolader, Henry B. Smith, John W. Wilcox, Jr., Assistant Attorney-General, M. L. Kahn, W. Harvey Armistead, A. A. Baumstark, Eugene Cook, Attorney'-General,*contra.

*Transferred to the Court of Appeals.*

*All the Justices concur.*