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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000891915
<NAME> RECONDITIONED SYSTEMS, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         695,781
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,281,894
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (27,250)
<INVENTORY>                                    942,360
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,936,955
<PP&E>                                         486,197
<DEPRECIATION>                                (349,675)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,252,627
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          794,526
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,586,982
<OTHER-SE>                                  (2,128,881)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,252,627
<SALES>                                      2,653,092
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,653,092
<CGS>                                       (2,028,782)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               (2,421,666)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,760
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (639)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                242,547
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            242,547
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   242,547
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
        

</TABLE>
tanico_ex101.htm

EXHIBIT 10.1
  
 Tanico Inc.
 387 Whitby Shores Greenway, Whitby, Ontario L1N 9R6 Canada
 Phone: 775-404-0333
 Fax: 775-302-8538
 Email: tanico.inc@outlook.com
  
 This letter is to confirm the terms of an agreement made on May 3, 2021 between Tanico Inc., and Tatiana Feneva. 
  
 Tatiana Feneva has verbally agreed if insufficient funds are raised to loan the company funds to complete the registration process.
  
 	May 3, 2021	By:	/S/Tatiana Feneva	
	  
	  
	Tatiana Feneva, President
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. BURNELL R. PAUL, JR.

May 28, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-60283

Summary Calendar

__________________

LUCIEN JOHN KIDD,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

MARDI GRAS CASINO CORPORATION,

 Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 1:94-CV-328

- - - - - - - - - -

December 18, 1995

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Lucien John Kidd appeals from the district court's entry of

summary judgment in favor of defendant Mardi Gras Casino

Corporation. Kidd argues that the district court erred by

determining that Casino Magic, a floating dockside casino owned

and operated by the defendant, was not a vessel for purposes of

the Jones Act and the general maritime law. Casino Magic, as an

"indefinitely moored, shore-side, floating casino," is a
No. 95-60283

-2-

nonvessel for Jones Act purposes. See Pavone v. Mississippi

Riverboat Amusement Corp., 52 F.3d 560, 570 (5th Cir. 1995). 

Kidd failed to meet his burden of showing the existence of a

genuine issue for trial, and defendant Mardi Gras Casino

Corporation was thus entitled to summary judgment as a matter of

law. The district court did not err by granting the defendant's

motion for summary judgment.

AFFIRMED.
#### Wright *v.*Stuart.

A party cannot assign for error the suppression of his depositions, unless the record show that notice of taking them had been given to his adversary. *121If the board, of commissioners fail to have any jurors selected for the second week of a term of the Circuit Court, and a jiiry he impanelled. during that week, the array may be challenged.

Saturday, *May*25.

ERROR to the *Clarh*Circuit Court.'

Blackford, *J.*

Stuart sued *Wright*before a justice of the peace and obtained a judgment. The defendant appealed. Verdict and judgment in the Circuit Court for the plaintiff.

Two of the defendant’s depositions were suppressed, previously to the trial, on the plaintiff’s motion ; and a challenge, made by the defendant to the array, was overruled. The record shows no error in the suppression of the depositions. It does not appear that any notice of the taking of them was given to the plaintiff; and we must presume, in favour of the judgment, that none was given. The want of such a notice was a good ground for excluding the depositions.

But there is an error in overruling the challenge to the array. The board of commissioners had failed to have any jurors selected for the second week of the term, during which week this trial took place ; on the calling of the cause, a jury was summoned and impanelled by the order of the Court; and the defendant, under these circumstances, challenged the array. This challenge ought to have been sustained. According to the statute, the jurors for the second week should have been selected by the board of commissioners ; and as there had been no such selection, there could be no unobjectionable jury impanelled during that week. The defendant might, perhaps, have waived the objection ; *Cole*v. Perry, 6 Cowen, 584 ; but he did- not do. so. He made the challenge at the proper time, and the array should have been quashed. The clause of the statute, saying that jurors may be obtained as at common law to make up any deficiency, will not help the plaintiff. That provision only applies to cases where the jurors have been selected and summoned agreeably to a previous part of the statute, but where the number in attendance is not sufficient to furnish a legal jury in the cause. Rev. Code, 1831, p. 291.

*122
      *EL. P.*Thornton, for the plaintiff.

*R.*Crawford, for the defendant.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed and the verdict set aside with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
Order entered September 20, 2021

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 21

- 00537

- CV

JOHN K. COIL, AVE, INC. AND EAST BAY, INC. , Appellant s

V.

JOHN A. COIL, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS REPRESENTATIVE OF EAST BAY, INC. , Appellee

On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 19

- 01235

O RDER

Before the Court is court reporter Antionette Reagor ’s September 17, 2021

request for an exten sion of time to file the reporter’s record. We GRANT the

extension and ORDER Ms. Reagor to file the record no later than October 1 ,

2021.

/s/ CRAIG SMITH JUSTICE
2 min read

# Hazards Evaluation

### Heather F. Riley

Jun 10, 2015

Article

            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   

***NASA WSTF***

White Sands Test Facility performs testing to understand the hazards associated with energetic materials such as aerospace propellants. These materials are very reactive and there are hazards associated with stability, thermal runaway, and flammability.

**Stability**Stability of propellants is a concern for spacecraft propulsion systems and storage facilities. We perform testing to determine the stability and materials interactions of aerospace propellants in contact with materials of construction, contaminants, or stabilizing additives.Catalytic decomposition of a propellant in contact with a surface, decomposition catalyzed by a contaminant, or autocatalytic decomposition when the chemical itself is the catalyst for a reaction are some of the reactions that can be studied.**Thermal Runaway**Thermal runaway refers to a situation where an increase in temperature changes the conditions in a way that causes a further increase in temperature, often leading to an explosion**.**White Sands can determine the kinetic parameters of the reactions allowing the prediction of hazardous situations.

**Flammability** Assessing ignition hazards relies on important parameters such as flash point and minimum ignition energy (MIE). We conduct ignition and flammability testing following NASA and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test methods for determining the flammability limits for fuels as a function of concentration, temperature, pressure, and partial pressures of oxygen.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 205 (Monday, October 25, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 65502]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-26846]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1941-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]


Minnesota; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of Minnesota (FEMA-1941-DR), dated October 13, 2010, and related 
determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: October 14, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident 
period for this declared disaster is closed effective October 14, 2010.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, 
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for 
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster 
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, 
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared 
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-26846 Filed 10-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, John W. McRoberts, certify that:

| 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of the registrant, MedEquities Realty Trust, 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 the statements 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, the periods presented in this report. |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| Date: April 10, 2017 |   | By:    | /s/ John W. McRoberts |
|----------------------|--------|--------|----------------------------|
|                 |   |   | John W. McRoberts          |
|                 |   |   | Chief Executive Officer    |
# Court of Appeals

**First District of Texas**

BILL OF COSTS

No. 01

- 14

- 00442

- CV

In the Interest J. R. W., a Child

NO. 2013

- 02967J IN THE 314TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS C OUNTY

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID/DUE STATUS PAID BY

MT FEE

MT FEE

RPT RECORD

CLK RECORD

INDIGENT

FILING $10.00

$10.00

$485.00

$144.00

$12.00

$195.00 07/23/2014

06/25/2014

06/05/2014

06/05/2014

06/05/2014

06/02/2014 EXEMPT

INDIGENT

INDIGENT

INDIGENT

INDIGENT

INDIGENT APE

ANT

STA

ANT

STA

ANT



### The costs incurred on appeal to the First Court of Appeals Houston, Texas are $85 6 .00.

Court costs in this case have been taxed in this Court’s judgment

I, Christopher A. Prine

, Clerk o f the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, do hereby certify that this is a true statement of the costs of appeal in this case.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my

hand and the seal of the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, this February 6 , 2015

.
#### ETHEL O’LEARY v. MARGARET NELSON AND CITY OF JERSEY CITY.

November 21, 1986.

Petition for certification denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       3,200,201
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,639,504
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,664,288
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,530,653
<PP&E>                                       2,022,073
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,665,118
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,198,196
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    24,272,318
<OTHER-SE>                                (17,805,396)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,665,118
<SALES>                                      7,943,204
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,943,204
<CGS>                                        6,515,809
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,515,809
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,852,409
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,381,297)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,381,297)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.29)
        

</TABLE>
# Sitemap

## January 13, 2005

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2005
- 01
- January 13, 2005

            - Titan Flyby C (T-C): Jan. 14, 2005 – Huygens Probe Descent
# Sitemap

## January 20, 2022

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2022
- 01
- January 20, 2022

            - NASA to Discuss Webb’s Arrival at Final Destination, Next Steps
            - A un año del mandato de Biden, la NASA mira hacia el futuro
            - NASA Flight Log Activities and Endorsement Codes
            - The waxing gibbous Moon above Minnesota
            - Minsk the capital city of Belarus
            - The atmospheric plume from an underwater volcano eruption
            - The city lights of Ireland and Great Britain
            - Russian spacewalkers Anton Shkaplerov and Pyotr Dubrov
            - Russian spacewalker Anton Shkaplerov works outside Nauka
            - Russian spacewalker Anton Shkaplerov works outside Nauka
#### JOHN R. KEOUGH, JR. v. MARGARET J. KEOUGH.

January 21, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. BETTY CARROL.

May 28, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

April 11, 2008

Mr. J. Wade Birdwell

Wallach, Andrews & Stouffer, P.C.

550 Bailey Avenue, Suite 500

Fort Worth, TX 76107

Mr. Robert L. Chaiken

Chaiken & Chaiken, P.C.

13355 Noel Road Suite 600

One Galleria Tower

Dallas, TX 75240

RE:Case Number:  07-0173

Court of Appeals Number:  02-06-00315-CV

Trial Court Number:  236-216713-06

Style:ROBERTO DIAZ-ROHENA, M.D.

v.

CYNTHIA S. MELTON

Dear Counsel:

Today the Supreme Court of Texas delivered the enclosed per curiam opinion and judgment in the above-referenced cause.  

Sincerely,

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

Enclosures

**Case No. 07-0173Page 1**
# Sitemap

## August 11, 2012

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2012
- 08
- August 11, 2012

            - First High-Resolution Color Mosaic of Curiosity’s Mastcam Images
585 A.2d 358

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ALBERT CUNNINGHAM AND TURNER L. ASKEW.

July 17, 1990.

Leave to appeal granted and the matter is summarily remanded to the Appellate Division for reconsideration in light of *State v. Thomas E. Lund/State v. Michael X. Harrison,*119 *N.J.*35, 573 A.2d 1376 (1990).

Jurisdiction is not retained.
# Sitemap

## March 14, 2007

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2007
- 03
- March 14, 2007

            - NASA Science Update to Discuss New Phenomena on the Sun
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 45521

STATE OF IDAHO ,

Plaintiff

- Respondent ,

v.

WESLEY ALLEN BOWEN ,

Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Filed: August 8, 2018

Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, Lemhi County. Hon. Alan C. Stephens , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years, for aggravated battery, affirmed

. Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Kimberly A. Coster

, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming , Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________ Before GUTIERREZ, Judge; HUSKEY, Judge; and LORELLO, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM
Wesley Allen Bowen pled guilty to aggravated battery , Idaho Code § 18

- 907(1)(a) . The
district court imposed a unified sentence of fifteen years, with a minimum period of confinement
of five years

. Bowen appeals, contending that the district court erred in failing to retain jurisdiction and that the sentence is excessive.
The primary purpose of the retained jurisdiction program is to enable the trial court to obtain additional information regarding the defendant’s rehabilitative potential and suitability for
probation, and probation is the ultimate objective of a defendant who is on retained jurisdiction.
State v. Chapel , 107 Idaho 193, 687 P.2d 583 (Ct. App. 1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565,2 567, 650 P.2d 707, 709 (Ct. App. 1982). There can be no abuse of discretion in a trial court’s refusal to retain jurisdiction if the court already has sufficient information upon which to
conclude that the defendant is not a suitable candidate for probation. State v. Beebe , 113 Idaho
977, 979, 751 P.2d 673, 675 (Ct. App. 1988); Toohill , 103 Idaho at 567, 650 P.2d at 709. Based
upon the information that was before the district court at the time of sentencing, we hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it declined to retain jurisdiction in this case.
Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and
need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 114, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

- 15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.
1984); Toohill , 103 Idaho at 568, 650 P.2d at 710 . When reviewing the length of a sentence, we

consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho 722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 39 1
(2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record in this case, we cannot say

that the district court abused its discretion.
Therefore, Bowen’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
1 The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United St ates District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 07-3697

___________ Darrin C. Savage, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Dennis D. Fastnacht, doing business * Western District of Missouri. as DDF Rental Property, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: February 13, 2009 Filed: February 24, 2009

___________ Before BYE, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Darrin Savage appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal--for lack of subject matter jurisdiction--of his complaint against Denni s Fastnacht and the court’s dismissal of his motion to amend his complaint. Upon de novo review of the district court’ s dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, see LeMay v. U.S. Postal Serv. , 450 F.3d 797, 799 (8th Cir. 2006), we-2- conclude that the district court correctly held that Savage ha d not met his burden to establish (1) diversity jurisdiction, see28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) (diversity requirements); OnePoint Solutions, LLC v. Borchert , 486 F.3d 342, 346 (8th Cir. 2007) (complete diversity rule); Jones v. Gale , 470 F.3d 1261, 1265 (8th Cir. 2006) (plaintiff has burden to establish subject matter jurisdic tion); or (2) federal question jurisdiction, even under a liberal construction of the complaint, see 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question jurisdiction); Stone v. Harry , 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004) (pro se complaints are to be construed liberally, but they still must allege sufficient facts to support claims advanced).
We further conclude that the districtcourt did not abuse its discretion in declining to allow Savage to amend his complaint, because the amendments he proposed would have been futile. See Hammer v. City of Osage Beach , 318 F.3d 832, 844 (8th Cir. 2003) (leave to amend should be denied for, inter alia, futility of amendment; denial of leave to amend complaint reviewed for abuse of discretion). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. Savage’s pending motions are denied.

______________________________