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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                         JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                           MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                     272,848
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,639
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           276,487   
<PP&E>                                           0
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             276,487
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       10,338
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                     6,554
<OTHER-SE>                                 200,845
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               276,487 
<SALES>                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,159
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             8,315
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (5,156) 
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              0
<DISCONTINUED>                              (5,156)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                (5,156) 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0
                               

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 76 (Tuesday, May 9, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E968-E969]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

    SOCIAL SECURITY CONTINUING DISABILITY REVIEW ACCOUNT ACT OF 1995

                                 ______

                        HON. ANDREW JACOBS, JR.

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                          Tuesday, May 9, 1995
  Mr. JACOBS. Mr. Speaker, I am today introducing the Social Security 
Continuing Disability Review Account Act of 1995. A summary of the 
legislation prepared by the minority staff of the Social Security 
Subcommittee follows.
  The goal of the legislation is to protect the integrity of the Social 
Security Disability Insurance program. It would do this by increasing 
the availability of funds for conducting Continuing Disability Review 
[CDRs]--so that people who are no longer disabled can be reviewed and 
removed from the disability rolls.
  The bill authorizes the Social Security Administration [SSA] to use a 
portion of the benefit savings it derives from conducting CDRs 
[[Page E969]] to conduct additional CDRs. Under the proposal, the 
benefit savings from removing those who are no longer disabled from the 
disability rolls are credited to a newly established CDR account in the 
disability insurance [DI] trust fund. It would operate as follows:
  No later than September 1 of each year, the Commissioner of Social 
Security would estimate the present value of DI trust fund savings for 
all future years resulting from cessation of benefit payments during 
the prior year based on CDRs. the Commissioner would certify these 
savings to the managing trustee of the DI trust fund.
  Upon receiving the Commissioner's certification, the managing trustee 
would transfer to the CDR account from amounts otherwise in the DI 
trust fund a portion of these estimated savings. This amount would vary 
depending on the CDR account balance but could not exceed 50 percent of 
estimated savings. No later than September 15 of each year, the 
Commissioner would certify to the managing trustee the expenditures 
required to perform mandated CDRs during the coming fiscal year. These 
expenditures would include the cost of staffing, training, purchase of 
medical and other evidence, and processing related to appeals and 
overpayments.
  Upon commencement of the fiscal year, the managing trustee would make 
available to the Commissioner from the CDR account, to the extent that 
funds were available, the amount that the Commissioner certified as 
necessary to perform mandated CDRs during that year. These funds could 
then be used by the Social Security Administration to perform the 
required CDRs.

                          ____________________
```
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

                                   EXHIBIT 27

                             FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE

<ARTICLE>                                                              5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPT 30,
2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         Jun-30-2001
<PERIOD-END>                              Sep-30-2000
<CASH>                                           4264
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   84354
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                     55962
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               155080
<PP&E>                                          10500
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3279
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 325657
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          930894
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                    366007
<COMMON>                                        65306
<OTHER-SE>                                          0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   325657
<SALES>                                         79854
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                79854
<CGS>                                           19349
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  194583
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1713
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (138279)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (138279)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (138279)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.02)


</TABLE>
News United States Air Force
 DAF releases pregnancy, postpartum experience surveyPublished April 19, 2022
                        
                        
                        Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs
                **ARLINGTON, Va. (AFNS) --**
                Airmen and Guardians who have been pregnant within the last five years recently received a survey via email about their pregnancy and postpartum experiences.The survey was sent to approximately 17,000 members and solicits feedback on topics including prenatal care, delivery, fitness, pregnancy loss, postpartum mental and physical recovery, infertility, and postpartum experiences.The information collected will help determine if any barriers to mission readiness exist due to pregnancy, pregnancy loss and postpartum recovery. It will also be used to shape policies that affect Airmen and Guardians’ pregnancy and postpartum experiences.“One obstacle for female service members is the lack of a structured postpartum recovery plan,” said Nnenna Johnson, a Department of the Air Force Women’s Initiatives Team female specialized health care co-lead. “Without adequate postpartum support, pregnant service members can struggle to return to mission readiness. This may lead to alienation, feelings of being a burden on their unit and ultimately making the choice to leave the service.”The core survey can take up to 30 minutes to complete, but members may select additional questions regarding topics that will provide further insight into their individual experiences.According to the Government Accountability Office, female service members make up 16.5% of the military, with an attrition rate that is 28% higher than their male counterparts.“Some women have the perception that they have to choose between family or career advancement,” said Master Sgt. Sylvia Eldridge, a female specialized health care co-lead for the WIT. “We need our leaders to encourage our members to take the survey. Without their stories and perspectives, we cannot determine if problems exist and cannot develop the solutions needed.”The survey was initiated by Eldridge and Johnson, who collaborated with the Surgeon General, Medical Readiness Agency, DAF Survey Office, and DAF Studies and Analysis Directorate.Airmen or Guardians who would like to provide feedback on their pregnancy and postpartum experiences but who do not receive an email invitation from the DAF Survey Office should provide their contact information to **HAF.Pre.Postpartum.Exp.Survey@gmail.com**.FS 



USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



survey 



pregnancy 



Postpartum 



experiences 



readiness 



One Air Force 



recovery 



WIT 



Women’s Initiative Team 



postpartum experience survey 



Airmen 



guardians 



Government Accountability Office 



surgeon general 



Medical Readiness Agency 



DAF Survey Office 



DAF Studies and Analysis Directorate
#### LICENSED RETAIL LIQUOR DEALERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNEAPOLIS v. L. R. DENTON.1

October 31, 1919.

No. 21,376.

Appeal and error •— denial of motion proper.

1. There was no error in denying the defendant’s motion to amend his answer at the trial by specifically denying that the plaintiff was a corporation.

Exclusion of evidence proper.

2. Two questions were asked calling for conclusions; and one was asked as to which it was at least doubtful whether the witness was qualified to testify. No offers were made to show what the proofs would be. There was no error in sustaining objections to the questions.

After the former appeal reported in 140 Minn. 461, 168 N. W. 553, the ease was tried before Montgomery, J., who granted plaintiff’s motion for a directed verdict for $86.20. From an order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant appealed.

Affirmed.

*Edward M. Nash,*for appellant.

*Brady, Robertson & Bonner,*for respondent.

1

 Reported in 174 N. W. 526.

Dibell, J.

Action on promissory notes made 'by the defendant to the plaintiff. There was a verdict directed for the plaintiff and the defendant appeals from the order denying his motion for a new trial.

1. The case was here before and is reported in 140 Minn. 461, 168 N. *W.*553. There the order of the court striking out the defendant’s answer as sham was sustained. The defendant filed an amended answer. He moved for a specific amendment before trial and that was allowed. At the trial he asked to amend by specifically denying the incorporation of the plaintiff as is required by statute in order to make an issue. G. S. 1913, § 7774. This was denied and error is assigned. The allowance of *82the amendment was discretionary. Nor does it seem likely that it was material. Moorman Mnfg. Co. v. Haack, 135 Minn. 126, 160 N. W. 258, and cases cited. There was no error.

2. The other errors available on the record are referred to in the third assignment of errors and relate to three questions asked of the defendant to which objections were sustained:

> “What were these notes given in payment for at the time you signed them ?”

> “For what purpose was the money to be used which these notes were to be given for?”

> “What representations did the committee, officers or agents of the association make to you at the time you signed these notes?” .

The first two invited conclusions and not facts or conversations. It does not appear that there was a committee, as assumed in the third question, nor that the plaintiff knew the officers and agents of the association. The contrary, if anything, appears. No foundation was laid. There was no effective offer to prove. The court is not strict in its holdings as to conclusions nor as to the necessity of offers of proof, but error must affirmatively appear to justify a reversal and none does.

Order affirmed.
Exhibit
32.1



CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Triton Pacific Investment Corporation, Inc., (the “Company”) for
the period ended December 31, 2017, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
we, Craig J. Faggen and Michael L. Carroll, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, 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 our
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 as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|                    |  |  |  |    |  |                                                                                                           
|------------------- |  |  |  | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                    |  |  | 
|Dated: April 2 2018 |  |  |  | By |  | /s/
    Craig J. Faggen                                                                                   
|                    |  |  |  |    |  | Craig
                                       J. Faggen
        
        Chief
        Executive Officer   
|                    |  |  | 
|                    |  |  |  | By |  | /s/
    Michael L. Carroll                                                                                
|                    |  |  |  |    |  | Michael
                                       L. Carroll
        
        Chief
        Financial Officer
News United States Air Force
 Around the Air Force: Afghan Evacuees, Future Home of ISR, 38th Rescue SquadronPublished Sept. 3, 2021
                        
                        By Tech. Sgt. Eric Mann
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --**
                Today’s look Around the Air Force highlights the Afghan evacuation efforts at Ramstein Air Base, Grand Forks Air Force Base will continue to lead the Air Force’s ISR capabilities into the future and the 38th Rescue Squadron practices astronaut recovery. (Hosted by Staff Sgt. Benjamin Cooper)



For previous episodes, click **here** for the Air Force TV page.
Related links:**- Gen. Harrigian’s opening remarks regarding Operation Allies Refuge****- Grand Forks AFB to lead future ISR missions****- 38 RQS trains to support SpaceX, Boeing**Featured Video 



AFTV 



ATAF 



Around the Air Force 



Air Force 



AF 



AfghanEvac 



ISR 



Grand Forks 



38th Rescue Squadron
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 Nova  Communications,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended  September 30, 2005 as filed with
the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report") the
undersigned  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: November 17, 2005          NOVA COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

                                 By: /s/ LESLIE J. HANDLER
                                 --------------------------
                                 Leslie J. Handler, President and
                                 Acting Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 476 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.476

                     One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and fourteen

                                 An Act

 
To amend the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Development Act to extend to the 
     Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park Commission.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CHESAPEAKE AND OHIO CANAL NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK 
COMMISSION.
    The Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park Commission 
(referred to in this Act as the ``Commission'') is authorized in 
accordance with the provisions of section 6 of the Chesapeake and Ohio 
Canal Development Act (16 U.S.C. 410y-4), except that the Commission 
shall terminate 10 years after the date of enactment of this Act.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
**Exhibit 31.2**

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to**

**Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)**

I, Dennis M. Mulroy, ChiefFinancial Officer of Cardium Therapeutics, Inc., certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Cardium Therapeutics, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report; 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

a) designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

b) any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Date: November 14, 2007
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 81 (Tuesday, May 16, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H5072]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

        DELETIONS OF SPONSORS FROM PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

  Under clause 4 of rule XXII, sponsors were deleted from public bills 
and resolutions as follows:

       H.R. 995: Mr. Allard.

                          ____________________
```
#### H. & T. C. R. R. Co. v. H. C. McGlasson.

(No. 1753, Op. Book No. 2, p. 382.)

Appeal from McLennan County.

June 8, 1881.

Opinion by

Walker, R. S., P. J.

§ 1119. *Jurisdiction; on appeal, record must show, of the court below.*In this case tbe amount in controversy was less than $200, and there was nothing in the record to show in what manner the county court acquired jurisdiction of the case. All that appeared in the transcript was the judgment of the county court and proceedings subsequent thereto. *Held,*this suit was for an amount below the original jurisdiction of the county court, and unless its jurisdiction to entertain it, by an appeal or by writ of *certiorari,*is manifest from the record, the record would be wholly wanting to show the essential fact authorizing that court to hear and determine the cause. The jurisdictional facts necessary to entitle the court to entertain a suit must be made to appear from the record, and, if they do not, the court will refuse to entertain the jurisdiction of it. In such case the court will, as it now does, of its’ own motion dismiss it. [Lyell v. Guadalupe Co. 28 Tex. 57; Loftin v. Nalley, id. 128; Chambers v. Miller, 7 Tex. 75.] The record must show the court affirmatively how the court below acquired jurisdiction. [Chrisman v. Graham, 51 Tex. 454.]

§ 1120. *Transcript; responsibility of appellant for correctness of.*The appellant is made responsible under the “ rules ” for bringing up a correct transcript; and if by inattention he has both failed to do so in the first instance, and in the appellate court has neglected to supply omissions in it by writ of *certiorari*to perfect it, he must be contented with submitting to the consequences of the dereliction.

Appeal dismissed.