alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<SUBSIDIARY>
  <NUMBER>          2
  <NAME>            POTOMAC CAPITAL INVESTMENT CORPORATION
                    POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY TRUST I
<MULTIPLIER>        1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    4,468,069
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                          0
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         450,742
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       660,725
<OTHER-ASSETS>                               1,128,257
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,707,793
<COMMON>                                       118,527
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                    1,011,625
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            696,571
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               1,826,723
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           50,000
<PREFERRED>                                    100,000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         1,857,893
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                 245,400<F1>
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   45,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                    159,046
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                20,772
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               2,402,959<F2>
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                6,707,793
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      908,908
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            37,299
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     739,996
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     777,295
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        131,613
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                              14,979
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 146,592
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        73,091
<NET-INCOME>                                    73,501
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                     14,114<F3>
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   59,387
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        98,322
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                      139,600<F4>
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         120,630
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    $0.50<F5>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $0.50
<FN>
<F1>Included on the Balance Sheet in the caption "Short-term debt."
<F2>Includes redeemable preferred securities of subsidiary trust.
<F3>Includes preferred stock redemption premium of $6,579.
<F4>Total annualized interest costs for all utility long-term debt and
manditorily redeemable preferred securities of subsidiary trust outstanding
at June 30, 1998.
<F5>Both basic and diluted earnings per share for the six months ended June
30, 1998 were $.50.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Order entered December 9, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-01390-CV

IN RE SUGAR RAY FRANKLIN, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 283rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F11-55114-T

ORDER

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relator’s November 28, 2016 

“application for writ of mandamus.” 

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

March 13, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00099

- CR

IN RE Gabriel James FUENTES

Original Habeas Proceeding 1

ORDER

On February 22, 2019, r elator filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus. After considering

the petition, this court concludes we do not have jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petition for writ of

habeas corpus is DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.

It is so ORDERED on March 13, 2019

.

_____________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 13th day of March, 2019

.

_____________________________ Keith E. Hottle, Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2015CR5272W, styled The State of Texas v. Gabriel James Fuentes , pending

in the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Hono rable Lori I. Valenzuela presiding.
#### Betty Holmes, as Administratrix of the Estate of Thomas F. Holmes, Deceased, Respondent, v Sal J. DeVincenzo et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., Sal J. DeVincenzo, Donald M. Pearlman, Scott R. Chudow and Augusto Rosas appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Owen, J.), dated May 16, 1988, which granted the plaintiff’s motion for a protective order and denied their demand for authorizations to obtain Family Court records.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The plaintiff commenced this action alleging that the defendants committed medical malpractice and seeking damages, *inter alia,*for the wrongful death of her deceased husband and loss of consortium. At an examination before trial the plaintiff mentioned that she and her husband were involved in Family Court proceedings in the late 1960s. The defendants sought to discover documents relating to the Family Court proceedings. The plaintiff moved for a protective order against the defendants’ demand for authorization to discover these documents. The Supreme Court granted the plaintiff’s motion. We affirm.

*595Even though the records of a Family Court proceeding are not open to indiscriminate public inspection, the court in its discretion may permit the inspection of any papers or records *(see, Gray v State of New York,*130 Misc 2d 65; Family Ct Act § 166), and the plaintiff may waive any privilege over matters protected by the Family Court Act by placing those matters into civil litigation *(Freeman v Corbin Ave. Bus Co.,*60 AD2d 824).

The appellants contend that the plaintiff, by seeking damages for loss of consortium, companionship and services, has placed in issue her marital relationship, and the records that the appellants have requested bear on the issue of these damages. Since the records and documents the appellants seek to discover refer to a proceeding that occurred over 15 years before this action was commenced, we find that such discovery request is unreasonable in time and irrelevant to the plaintiff’s marital relationship at the time her husband died *(see, Lapidus v Hiltzik,*160 AD2d 682; *Matos v City of New York, 78*AD2d 834; *Weis v Coe,*40 NYS2d 222). Bracken, J. R, Kunzeman, Eiber and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                        5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from 6/30/98
Financial Statement and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                  OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                    JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                               20,089
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       622,673
<ALLOWANCES>                                         14,344
<INVENTORY>                                         483,012
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  1,122,612
<PP&E>                                            2,491,021
<DEPRECIATION>                                    2,257,033
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    1,390,765
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               470,539
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                             91,003
<OTHER-SE>                                          698,091
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      1,390,765
<SALES>                                           2,984,534
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  2,984,534
<CGS>                                             2,588,947
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     2,878,250
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        350
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   19,696
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      87,288
<INCOME-TAX>                                            175
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                         89,113
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             0
        


</TABLE>
IA

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 15

Designating the square dance as the national folk dance of the United

States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 8, 2001

Mr. SAXTON introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to

the Committee on Government Reform

JOINT RESOLUTION

Designating the square dance as the national folk dance

of the United States.

Whereas square dancing has been a popular tradition in

America since early colonial days;

Whereas square dancing has attained a revered status as part

of the folklore of this Nation;

Whereas square dancing is a joyful expression of the vibrant

spirit of the people of the United States;

Whereas square dancing promotes the practice of good manners and proper etiquette;

Whereas square dancing is a traditional form of family recreation that fosters family unity, a basic strength of this

Nation;
2

•HJ 15 IH

Whereas square dancing embodies democratic principles by

dissolving arbitrary social distinctions among its participants; and

Whereas it is fitting that the square dance be added to the

array of symbols of our national character and pride:

Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the square dance is designated the national folk

4 dance of the United States.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 10, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 52672]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20949]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs


Jicarilla Apache Nation Liquor Ordinance Number Correction

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Indian Affairs published a document in the 
Federal Register of August 8, 2008, concerning the amended Jicarilla 
Apache Nation Liquor Ordinance. The document contained an incorrect 
ordinance number.

DATES: Effective Date: This correction is effective as of September 10, 
2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Colliflower, Office of 
Tribal Services, 1849 C Street, NW., Mail Stop 4513-MIB, Washington, DC 
20240; Telephone (202) 513-7640; Fax (202) 208-5113.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of August 8, 2008, in FR Doc. E8-18287, on 
page 46326, in the first column, correct the number of the Ordinance to 
read:
Ordinance No. 2007-O-525-12.

    Dated: September 2, 2008.
George T. Skibine,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Economic Development.
 [FR Doc. E8-20949 Filed 9-9-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-4J-P
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 704 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 704

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To amend section 708 of title 17, United States Code, to permit the 
  Register of Copyrights to waive fees for filing an application for 
  registration of a copyright claim in certain circumstances, 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 ``Artistic Recognition for Talented 
Students Act'' or the ``ARTS Act''.

SEC. 2. WAIVER OF FEES FOR WINNERS OF CERTAIN COMPETITIONS.

    Section 708 of title 17, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(e)(1) In this subsection, the term `covered competition' means--
            ``(A) an art competition sponsored by the Congressional 
        Institute that is open only to high school students; and
            ``(B) the competition described in section 3 of H. Res. 77, 
        as adopted by the 113th Congress.
    ``(2) With respect to a work that wins a covered competition, the 
Register of Copyrights--
            ``(A) shall waive the requirement under subsection (a)(1) 
        with respect to an application for registration of a copyright 
        claim for that work if that application is filed not later than 
        the last day of the calendar year following the year in which 
        the work claimed by the application wins the covered 
        competition (referred to in this paragraph as the `covered 
        year'); and
            ``(B) may waive the fee described in subparagraph (A) for 
        an application filed after the end of the covered year if the 
        fee would have been waived under that subparagraph had the 
        application been submitted before the last day of the covered 
        year.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 23, 2021.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
117th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 704

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To amend section 708 of title 17, United States Code, to permit the 
  Register of Copyrights to waive fees for filing an application for 
  registration of a copyright claim in certain circumstances, and for 
                            other purposes.
```
EXHIBIT 32.1



                       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 Portsmouth Square, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I John V. Winfield, President and 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, to the best of my knowledge,
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.


Date: November 14, 2006                         /s/ John V. Winfield
                                                ----------------------------
                                                John V. Winfield, President
                                                and Chief Executive Officer




[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Portsmouth Square, Inc. and will be retained by Portsmouth
Square, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.]
1 A federal court may also grant a habeas corpus petition

when a state court’s resolution of a question of federal law is

based on “an unreasonable determination of the facts.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2254(d)(2). Ayer does not argue that the state court’s ruling

was based on an unreasonable factual determination.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Daniel E. Ayer, Sr.

v. Case No. 04-cv-434-PB

Bruce Cattell, Warden, NHSP

O R D E R

Daniel Ayer argues in a habeas corpus petition that the

State of New Hampshire violated his constitutional right not to

be prosecuted twice for the same offense when it retried him

following his successful appeal.

This is not a close case. A federal court may not grant a

habeas corpus petition because of a legal error unless the state

court ruling under review “resulted in a decision that was

contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly

established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court of the

United States.”1 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). Neither circumstance

Case 1:04-cv-00434-PB Document 26 Filed 07/08/05 Page 1 of 3
-2-

is present here. 

The state court’s decision to permit a retrial was not

contrary to Supreme Court precedent because that precedent makes

clear that a state ordinarily is free to retry a defendant whose

conviction has been vacated on appeal. See United States v.

DiFrancesco, 449 U.S. 117, 130-31 (1980); Burks v. United States,

437 U.S. 1, 15-17 (1978). “The only established exception to

this rule is where reversal of the conviction is grounded on

insufficiency of the evidence.” United States v. Singer, 785

F.2d 228, 238 (8th Cir. 1982). Ayer’s reliance on Oregon v.

Kennedy, 456 U.S. 667 (1982), for the proposition that a retrial

following a successful appeal is prohibited if the appeal was

provoked by prosecutorial or judicial misconduct is misplaced. 

Though Kennedy involved a double jeopardy challenge in the

context a retrial following a mistrial, the Supreme Court has yet

to apply Kennedy to cases in which a retrial is required because

of a successful appeal. See, e.g., Greyson v. Kellam, 937 F.2d

1409, 1414 (9th Cir. 1991) (noting the issue). 

The state court’s decision to retry Ayer also did not

involve an unreasonable application of Supreme Court precedent. 

Kennedy requires a finding of prosecutorial or judicial

Case 1:04-cv-00434-PB Document 26 Filed 07/08/05 Page 2 of 3
-3-

misconduct to support a double jeopardy claim. 456 U.S. at 674. 

The record in this case contains no such evidence. Thus, the

state court did not act unreasonably in failing to apply Kennedy

to bar Ayer’s retrial even if its holding reasonably could be

extended to cover a retrial following a successful appeal. 

Respondent’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 19) is

granted.

SO ORDERED.

_____________________________

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

July 8, 2005

cc: Daniel E. Ayer, Sr.

Simon R. Brown, Esq.

Case 1:04-cv-00434-PB Document 26 Filed 07/08/05 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT Section 1350 Certification as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002    The undersigned officer of Globalink, LTD. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.     Date: April 16, 2013 By: /s/ Robin Young  Robin Young Chief Executive Officer   Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT Section 1350 Certification as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002    The undersigned officer of Globalink, LTD. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.     Date: April 16, 2013 By: /s/Ben Choi  Ben Choi Chief Financial Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 9, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52355-52356]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20786]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Notices

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.

Date & Time: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 at 10 a.m.

[[Page 52356]]

Place:  999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC.

Status: This meeting will be closed to the public.

Items to be Discussed: Compliance matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g. 
Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g, 438(b), and Title 26, 
U.S.C. Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings 
or arbitration. Internal personnel rules and procedures or matters 
affecting a particular employee.

Person to Contact for Information:  Mr. Robert Biersack, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Mary W. Dove,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E8-20786 Filed 9-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-M
```