alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Michelle Zajac","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/mzajac\/","title":"Earth’s Atmospheric Glow","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"A3K0tFHkRz\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/iss070e076676\/\">Earth’s Atmospheric Glow<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/iss070e076676\/embed\/#?secret=A3K0tFHkRz\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Earth’s Atmospheric Glow” — NASA\" data-secret=\"A3K0tFHkRz\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/iss070e076676orig-iotd.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
Exhibit 31.2
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Jean M. Nelson, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Virbac Corporation; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis 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 thisreport; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) 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 disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 (a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.        Date: April 29, 2005 By:  /s/Jean M. Nelson    Jean M. Nelson    Executive Vice President
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 1 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 2 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 3 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 4 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 5 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 6 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 7 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 8 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 9 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 10 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 11 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 12 of 13
Case 2:15-cv-01769-SPL Document 12-1 Filed 12/11/15 Page 13 of 13
1 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

______________ No. 0 9

- 2488

_____________ PINE BELT AUTOMOTIVE INC, a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Appellant v. ROYAL INDEMNITY COMPANY; GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY; MEMBER AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP INC

_____________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for t he District of New Jersey (Civ. No. 3

- 06

- cv - 05995 ) Dist rict Judge: Hon. Joel A. Pisano Submitted pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

Monday, October 25 , 2010 Before: McKEE , Chief Judge , SLOVITER and RENDELL , Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: No vember 4, 2010)

__________ OPINION

_________
McKEE, Chief Judge

.2

Appellant Pine Belt Automotive, Inc. appeals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment to Defendant

- Appellee Granite State Insurance Company

. For the reasons set forth below, we will affirm. Because we write primarily for the parties, we need not repeat the facts and procedural history of this case. Moreover, the district court has ably summarized that background. See Pine Belt Auto., Inc. v. Royal Indem. Co. , 2008 WL 4682582 (D.N.J. Oct. 21, 2008); Pine Belt Auto., Inc. v. Royal Indem. Co. , 2009 WL 424384 (D.N.J. Feb. 19, 2009); Pine Belt Auto., Inc. v. Royal Indem. Co. , 2009 WL 1025564 (D.N.J. Apr. 16, 2009). On appeal, Pine Belt argues that the district court erred in finding that : (1) the alteration of credit applications by Pine Belt’s employee was not covered under Granite’s policy ; (2) Granite was not p rohibited by waiver or estoppel from arguing that the alteration of credit applications by Pine Belt’s employee was not covered; (3) Royal’s declination of coverage was appropriate for additional reasons beyond the fact that Pine Belt’s losses did not fall within the extended discovery period; (4) Royal’s policy was unambiguous, reasonable and enforceable, and did not violate public policy; (5) Pine Belt could not recover under the Truth in Lending provisions in the Granite and Royal policies. In his detailed and thoughtful opinions filed in this case , Judge Pisano care fully
and clearly explained his reasons for granting motions for summary judgment filed by Granite and Royal and denying Pine Belt’s motion for reconsideration

. See Pine Belt Auto., Inc. v. Royal Indem. Co. , 2008 WL 4682582 (D.N.J. Oct. 21, 2008); Pine Belt Auto., Inc. v. Royal Indem. Co. , 2009 WL 424384 (D.N.J. Feb. 19, 2009); Pine Belt3

Auto., Inc. v. Royal Indem. Co. , 2009 WL 1025564 (D.N.J. Apr. 16, 2009). W e will affirm the district court’s o rders substantially for the reasons set for th in those o rders without further elaboration.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

TIMOTHY MARTIN DUKE,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 761 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Unpublished Memorandum and

Order of the Superior Court at No.

2093 MDA 2016 entered on October
24, 2017, affirming the Judgment of Sentence of the York County Court of

Common Pleas at No. CP

- 67

- CR

0007563

- 2015 entered on November
22, 2016

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 16 th day of May, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED . Further, the ruling of the Superior Court is VACATED and the case is

REMANDED to the trial court for a reconsideration in light of this Court’s decision in

Commonwealth v. Romero , 37 EAP 2016, ___ A.3d ___, 2018 WL 1960611 (Pa. 2018).
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement Nos. 333-134867,333-137961 and 333-130193, in Registration Statement Nos. 333-121350, 333-115765,and 333-157760 on Form S-3; in Registration Statement No. 333-132340on Form S-4, and in Post-Effective Amendment No.1 to RegistrationStatement Nos. 333-87633 and 333-84344 on Form S-8, of our reportsdated September 28, 2009, relatingto the consolidated financial statements and consolidated financial statementschedules of FerrellgasPartners, L.P. and the effectiveness of Ferrellgas Partners, L.P.’s internalcontrol over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-Kof Ferrellgas Partners, L.P. for the year ended July 31, 2009**.**

 

 
| *DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP* |   |
|----------------------------------|--------|
|                             |   |
| Kansas  City, Missouri           |   |
| September 28,  2009         |   |

 

----
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 Getty Images, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-Q), I, Thomas Oberdorf, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section
906), that:



| | (1) |  | The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)), as amended; and
| | --- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) |  | The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This certification is being furnished solely for purposes of Section 906.

Date:
August 8, 2007



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|                                                 
|/s/    THOMAS OBERDORF                           
|Thomas Oberdorf                                  
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"The Sun","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"6QcdgId9NF\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/sun\/\">The Sun<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/sun\/embed\/#?secret=6QcdgId9NF\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“The Sun” — NASA\" data-secret=\"6QcdgId9NF\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/462977main_sun_layers_full.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":450}
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors
Gemstar International Group Limited:

  We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(No. 333-77391) on Form S-8 of Gemstar International Group Limited of our
report dated May 9, 1999, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of
Gemstar International Group Limited and subsidiaries as of March 31, 1998 and
1999, and the related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders'
equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three year period ended
March 31, 1999, which report is included in Gemstar International Group
Limited's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 1999.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Los Angeles, California
June 29, 1999
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 623 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 623

To amend the Public Buildings Act of 1959 concerning the calculation of 
                     public building transactions.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 5, 1997

Mr. Traficant introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Public Buildings Act of 1959 concerning the calculation of 
                     public building transactions.

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

SECTION 1. PUBLIC BUILDING TRANSACTIONS.

    Section 7 of the Public Buildings Act of 1959 (40 U.S.C. 606) is 
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(g) Calculation of Transactions.--For purposes of calculating 
public building transactions, any contract entered into by the 
Administrator under this Act for the purchase, lease-purchase, or lease 
of a public building approved pursuant to subsection (a) shall be 
treated in the same manner as if the contract was entered into 
immediately prior to fiscal year 1991.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 23.3











INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


     We  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in  Amendment  No.  3 to
Registration Statement No. 333-103267-02 of Ferrellgas,  L.P. on Form S-3 of our
reports,  which  express an  unqualified  opinion  and  include  an  explanatory
paragraph  relating to changes in  accounting  principles,  dated  September 29,
2003, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Ferrellgas,  L. P. for the
year ended July 31, 2003.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Kansas City, Missouri
October 20, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF KING PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           8,047
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  106,990
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (4,000)
<INVENTORY>                                    102,990
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               193,139
<PP&E>                                         132,701
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (15,680)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,124,748
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          112,112
<BONDS>                                        150,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     775,981
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,124,748
<SALES>                                        422,492
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               454,582
<CGS>                                          100,183
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  363,116
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (211)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,840
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 69,906
<INCOME-TAX>                                    42,381
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             27,525
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 (7,246)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    20,279
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.13


</TABLE>
#### Stewart et ux *v.*Lyon et ux. J. F. Drasdale *v.*Lyon et ux.

Prima Facie Evidence of Insolvency — Return Nulla Bona.

The return of an execution, “no property found,” is only prima facie evidence of insolvency.

Same.

Such a return would not lay the foundation for the interposition of the court to make provision for a wife, out of the effects of the husband, without other evidence, allegation or prayer for that purpose.

APPEAL FROM GRANT CIRCUIT COURT.

September 21, 1869.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Hardin:

It was expressly decided by this court in the case of *Tobin's Guardian vs. Dixon and Wife (2 Met., 422)*that a chose in action which has accrued to a married woman during her coverture and which the husband can reduce to possession, can be subjected to *315the payment of bis debts at the instance of bis creditors, unless such a state of case exist as to authorize the court to appropriate the fund sought to be subjected as an equitable provision for the wife.

Drane, *for appellants.*

*Rankin, Hamilton, for appellees.*

In these cases the land sold to Poor, and for which the debt in controversy was created was this general estate of Mrs. Lyon, and although the note of Poor was made payable' to her, it virtually belonged to her husband, and was liable to be subjected to the plaintiff’s claims, subject to the right of Mrs. Lyon to have an equitable settlement made for her out of it, on the presentation of a proper ease to authorize the chancellor to interpose in her behalf for that purpose.

Whether she might or not have shown herself entitled to have such a provision made for her does not appear in these cases. No such equitable provision was sought by her nor was it shown that her own circumstances, or those of her husband, required it. The fact that the plaintiffs’ executions against Lyon were returned “no property found” at most, was only *prima facie*evidence of Lyon’s insolvency. He may, neverthelesss, have been a man' of wealth. The returns did not, therefore, lay the foundation for the interposition of the court to provide for the wife, without other evidence, allegation or prayer for that purpose.

The judgment must, therefore, be reversed, but on the return of the cause Mrs. Lyon will be allowed by amended pleading to assert her claim to an equitable provision should she ask to do so.

Wherefore, said judgments are reversed, and the causes remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.