alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                              
<ARTICLE>                          5
<CIK>                              0000892381
<NAME>                             F-1000 Futures Fund L.P., Series IX
                                    
<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                     JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                       JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                   1,978,295
<SECURITIES>                             5,625,879
<RECEIVABLES>                              234,248
<ALLOWANCES>                                    0
<INVENTORY>                                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         7,838,422
<PP&E>                                          0
<DEPRECIATION>                                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           7,838,422
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      358,372
<BONDS>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                        0
<OTHER-SE>                               7,480,050
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             7,838,422
<SALES>                                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           439,570
<CGS>                                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           104,148
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (276,716)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             0
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                             (276,716)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   49.54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0
        

</TABLE>
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied; Supplemental and Concurring

Memorandum Opinions filed February 3, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-14-00875-CV

IN RE WILMA REYNOLDS, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

300th District Court

Brazoria County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 48170

CONCURRING MEMORANDUM OPINION

I agree that mandamus relief should be denied. I write separately, however, 

to emphasize the Texas Legislature has provided clearly that the gamesmanship 

that appears to be at play in this matter need not be tolerated. 
2

Pursuant to section 30.016(d) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies 

Code, mandamus relief is not available to review the denial of a tertiary recusal 

motion. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 30.016(d). A “‘tertiary recusal motion’ 

means a third or subsequent motion for recusal or disqualification filed against a 

district court . . . by the same party in a case.” Id. § 30.016(a). The statute does not 

permit a party to start over in its count by invoking a different rule or statute 

governing the identity of the presiding judge. The objection to an assignment of an 

unelected judge provided in the Government Code is in the nature of a motion to 

recuse or disqualify. Mitchell Energy Corp. v. Ashworth, 943 S.W.2d 436, 440 

(Tex. 1997) (“Section 74.053 clearly is intended to give parties the right to veto the 

assignment of certain former judges.”); see also Tex. Gov’t Code § 74.053. Surely 

the Legislature did not intend to give parties more protection against certain former

judges than those whose impartiality might reasonably be questioned. 

I would find that Ms. Reynolds’ motions were subject to CPRC 30.016,

none of Judge Walker’s rulings denying motions to recuse or disqualify is subject 

to mandamus relief, and the imposition of sanctions under 30.016(c) was not an 

abuse of discretion for which mandamus relief would lie.

/s/ Martha Hill Jamison

Justice

Panel consists of Justices Boyce, Jamison, and Donovan (Donovan, J., majority).
{"agency":"NASA","generated":"2013-07-05 11:50:14","items":[{"id":"1","parent":null,"text":"Reporting Quarter","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-year","label":"Reporting Year","options":[{"label":"2011","value":"2011"},{"label":"2012","value":"2012"},{"label":"2013","value":"2013"}],"value":"2013"},{"type":"select","name":"2-1-quarter","label":"Repoeting Quarter","options":[{"label":"Q1","value":"Q1"},{"label":"Q2","value":"Q2"},{"label":"Q3","value":"Q3"},{"label":"Q4","value":"Q4"}],"value":"Q3"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-1","parent":"1","text":"Ten Oldest Requests","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-1-oldest","label":"Ten Oldest","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"7"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-3","parent":"1","text":"","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-3-closed","label":"Ten Oldest Closed","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"7"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-2","parent":"1","text":"FOIA Requests Information","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/08\/21","fields":[{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-component","label":"Component","options":[],"value":["ARC","DFRC","GRC","GSFC","JSC","LaRC","MSFC","JPL","NSSC","OIG","SSC","KSC","OGC","HQ"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-received","label":"Received","options":[],"value":["5","2","6","18","50","6","13","3","3"," 7"," 0","11"," 0","66"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-processed","label":"Processed","options":[],"value":["4","2","6","18","11","6","13","3","3"," 7"," 0","11"," 0","62"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-backlog","label":"Backlog","options":[],"value":["1"," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," "," ","1"," ","4"]}],"multiple":true}],"year":"2013","quarter":"Q3"}
{"agency":"NASA","generated":"2017-01-27 10:20:19","items":[{"id":"1","parent":null,"text":"Reporting Quarter","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-year","label":"Reporting Year","options":[{"label":"2011","value":"2011"},{"label":"2012","value":"2012"},{"label":"2013","value":"2013"},{"label":"2014","value":"2014"},{"label":"2015","value":"2015"},{"label":"2016","value":"2016"}],"value":"2017"},{"type":"select","name":"2-1-quarter","label":"Reporting Quarter","options":[{"label":"Q1","value":"Q1"},{"label":"Q2","value":"Q2"},{"label":"Q3","value":"Q3"},{"label":"Q4","value":"Q4"}],"value":"Q1"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-1","parent":"1","text":"Ten Oldest Requests","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-1-oldest","label":"Ten Oldest","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"8"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-3","parent":"1","text":"","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-3-closed","label":"Ten Oldest Closed","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"5"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-2","parent":"1","text":"FOIA Requests Information","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/08\/21","fields":[{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-component","label":"Component","options":[],"value":["AFRC","ARC","GRC","GSFC","HQ","JPL","JSC","KSC","LaRC","MSFC","NSSC","OGC","OIG","SSC"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-received","label":"Received","options":[],"value":["1","3","10","33","91","8","10","12","11","11","5"," ","6","2"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-processed","label":"Processed","options":[],"value":["1","7","8","31","82","8","13","11","8","10","5"," ","6","2"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-backlog","label":"Backlog","options":[],"value":[" "," "," "," ","3"," ","6","2"," ","1"," "," "," "," "]}],"multiple":true}],"year":"2017","quarter":"Q1"}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0381

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

CLAYTON DOUGLAS KIRN,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT

Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the 

Appellant is given an extension of time until February 27, 2023, to 

prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief.

No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 27 2023

01/27/2023

Case Number: DA 21-0381
**EXHIBIT 13.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

 

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

 

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

 

**SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F CryptoLogic Limited (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Stephen Taylor, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that

 

|   | (3) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (4) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

/s/ Stephen Taylor                                                                                        

Stephen Taylor

Chief Financial Officer

 

| Date: | May 20, 2008 |
|-------|--------------|

 

 

 

----
#### Dumont *v.*Lockwood.

*Wednesday, December*17.

An objection to a declaration in trover because the venue is wrong, can be made only on special demurrer.

ERROR to the *Clinton*Circuit Court.

Dewey, J.

— *Dumont*commenced an action of trover against *Lockwood*in the *Clinton*Circuit Court, laying the venue in *Cass*county. The defendant pleaded not guilty, upon which there was issue. The. cause was continued several times, when, on the motion of the defendant, the Court dismissed the action on the ground of a supposed want of jurisdiction.

We think the Court was mistaken in supposing they had no jurisdiction of the cause. The statute of jeofails, which was in force when the action was commenced, adopts the act of 16 and 17 Car. 2, c. 8. R. S. 1838, p. 456. The *English*statute enacts, that no judgment shall be reversed or arrested “for that there is no right venue, so as the cause were tried by a jury, of the proper county or place where the action is laid; ” and one clause of our present statute of jeofails, which was in force when the cause was dismissed, contains a similar provision. R. S. 1843, pp. 714, 715. It has been held, that the statute of Car. 2 cured a wrong venue, if there had been a verdict in the county where the action was laid or brought. *Craft*v. *Boite,*1 Saund. 246, 248, n. 3. And even in a local action brought and tried in a wrong county, the defect, if it appear of record, is aided by the same statute. A demurrer, however, will reach it. *Id.*241, c, n. 6.—*Mayor of London*v. *Cole,*7 T. R. 583. So,- also, a local action may, by the consent of the parties appearing of record, be tried in another county. 1 Chitt. PI. 268. And in transitory actions like this, a wrong venue in a declaration is mere matter of form, and can be reached only by a special demurrer. *Briggs*v. *The Nantucket Bank,*5 Mass. R. 94.—*Gilbert*v. *The Nantucket Bank, Id.*97. These authorities suffice to show that the Circuit Court of *Clinton*county had jurisdiction of this cause, and that its dis-mission was erroneous.

*577
      *H. P. Biddle,*for the plaintiff.

*D. Mace*and *W. Wright,*for the defendant.

*Per Curiam.*

— The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
II 

Calendar No. 435 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2136 

To extend the final report date and termination date of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, to provide additional 

funding for the Commission, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 26, 2004 

Mr. ROBERTS, from the Select Committee on Intelligence, reported the 

following original bill; which was read twice and placed on the calendar 

A BILL 

To extend the final report date and termination date of 

the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the 

United States, to provide additional funding for the Commission, 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. EXTENSION OF NATIONAL COMMISSION ON 

4 TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED 

5 STATES. 

6 (a) FINAL REPORT DATE.—Subsection (b) of section 

7 610 of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2 

•S 2136 PCS 

1 2003 (Public Law 107–306; 6 U.S.C. 101 note; 116 Stat. 

2 2413) is amended by striking ‘‘18 months’’ and inserting 

3 ‘‘20 months’’. 

4 (b) TERMINATION DATE.—Subsection (c) of that sec5 tion is amended— 

6 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘60 days’’ and 

7 inserting ‘‘30 days’’; and 

8 (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘60-day pe9 riod’’ and inserting ‘‘30-day period’’. 

10 (c) ADDITIONAL FUNDING.—Section 611 of that Act 

11 (6 U.S.C. 101 note; 116 Stat. 2413) is amended— 

12 (1) by redesignating subsection (b) as sub13 section (c); 

14 (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the fol15 lowing new subsection (b): 

16 ‘‘(b) ADDITIONAL FUNDING.—In addition to the 

17 amounts made available to the Commission under sub18 section (a) and under chapter 2 of title II of the Emer19 gency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2003 

20 (Public Law 108–11; 117 Stat. 591), of the amounts ap21 propriated for the programs and activities of the Federal 

22 Government for fiscal year 2004 that remain available for 

23 obligation, not more than $1,000,000 shall be available for 

24 transfer to the Commission for purposes of the activities 

25 of the Commission under this title.’’; and 
3 

•S 2136 PCS 

1 (3) in subsection (c), as so redesignated, by 

2 striking ‘‘subsection (a)’’ and inserting ‘‘this sec3 tion’’. 
Calendar No. 435 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2136 

A BILL 

To extend the final report date and termination 

date of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, to provide additional funding for the Commission, and for other purposes. 

FEBRUARY 26, 2004 

Read twice and placed on the calendar
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

    KPMG LLP
    CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS                           Telephone     (416) 777-8500
    Commerce Court West                             Telefax       (416) 777-8818
    PO Box 31 Stn Commerce Court                    www.kpmg.ca
    Suite 3300
    Toronto ON M5L 1B2

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS CONSENT

The Board of Directors of CryptoLogic Inc.

We hereby consent to the inclusion of our report dated January 31, 2003, with
respect to the financial statements of CryptoLogic Inc. as of and for the years
ended December 31, 2002 and 2001 and our report dated January 25, 2002 with
respect to the financial statements as of and for the years ended December 31,
2001 and 2000 in CryptoLogic Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 20-F and to the
reference to our firm under the heading "Selected Financial Data" in the Annual
Report on Form 20-F.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Chartered Accountants

Toronto, Canada

June 12, 2003
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATION****PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**     I, Jason F. Totah, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Stonepath Group, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this annual report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annualreport;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annual report based on suchevaluation; and     (c) Disclosed in this annual report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’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 over financialreporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors:     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.DATE: March 31, 2006       By: /s/ Jason F. Totah         Jason F. Totah    *Chief Executive Officer*
National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Headquarters
Washington, DC 20546-0001 ?
December 18, 2019
Reply to Attn of: General Law Practice Group
TO: Distribution
FROM: Agency Counsel for Ethics

SUBJECT: Determination Regarding Attendance by NASA employees at the Maryland
Space Business Roundtable (MSBR) Lunch on January 21, 2020

On January 21, 2020, the Maryland Space Business Roundtable (MSBR), a nonprofit
organization under 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, will host a lunch at the Martin’s
Crosswinds in Greenbelt, MD, starting at 11:30 a.m. The guest speaker is Dr. Neil Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Environmental Observation and Prediction,
performing the duties of Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,

Approximately 350 people have been invited to attend. Attendees will have a diversity of
views or interests and will include representatives from the legislative branch, state and local
government officials, representatives from industry, employees of Federal agencies,
academia, media and members of the public. The estimated cost of the event, including all
food and beverages, is $34 per person. MSBR is in control of the organizing, planning and
invitations for this event. Attendance at this event will allow NASA attendees to exchange
information regarding various NASA programs. I find that the event meets the requirements
of a “widely attended gathering” as defined in 5 C.F.R. § 2635.204(g)(2).

I further determine that there is an Agency interest in having NASA personnel attend the
event because it will provide an opportunity for the invited persons to exchange ideas and
views pertaining to NASA’s policies, programs and operations. NASA employees, including
NASA employees in non-career positions who are required to sign the ethics pledge under
Executive Order 13770, who do not have a significant role in a matter affecting the interests
of the sponsor may accept an invitation for free attendance to the event. In those
citcumstances, I find that the Agency’s interest in attendance outweighs any concern that the
individual may be, or may appear to be, improperly influenced in the performance of their
duties.

However, NASA employees who have a significant role in any pending matter affecting the
interests of the MSBR, such as procurement duties, program management, or negotiating or
administering a Space Act Agreement, should seek a separate determination from their local
ethics counselor as to whether they may accept the invitation.

aay gy

Adam F. Greenstone
**Exhibit 24.6**

**POWER OF ATTORNEY**

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, thatthe undersigned director and/or officer of eLoyalty Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), hereby constitutes and appoints each of Kelly D. Conway and William B. Noon, signing singly, as the undersigned’s true and lawfulattorney-in-fact, with full power and authority and full power of substitution, re-substitution, or revocation, to: 

(a) execute for, in the name and on behalf of the undersigned, in the undersigned’s capacity as a director and/or officer of the Company, the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscalyear ended January 1, 2011, together with any and all amendments thereto on Form 10-K/A deemed necessary, appropriate, or desirable (collectively, the “Form 10-K”), pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the rulesthereunder; 

(b) file the Form 10-K, with all exhibits thereto and other documents in connection therewith,with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and any stock exchange or market or similar authority on which the Company’s Common Stock is listed for trading and any other governmental or regulatory authority, and otherwise to act for himand on his behalf in connection therewith; and 

(c) take any other action of any type whatsoever in connectionwith the foregoing which, in the opinion of such attorney-in-fact, may be required, appropriate, or desirable to be done in the exercise of any of the rights and powers herein granted, as fully to all intents and purposes as the undersigned might orcould do if personally present, hereby ratifying and confirming all that such attorney-in-fact, or such attorney-in-fact’s substitute or substitutes, shall lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue of this Power of Attorney and the rights andpowers herein granted. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed this Power of Attorney as of this 15thday of February 2011.