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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-QSB
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           3,411
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,169,307
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,341,947
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       4,002,467
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,827,839
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,193,000
<COMMON>                                         5,815
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,827,839
<SALES>                                     25,056,790
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            25,056,790
<CGS>                                       21,978,573
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               21,978,573
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            19,425,764
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               153,697
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,925,157
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (19,134,518)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (19,134,518)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (19,134,518)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.34)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21



                         MOBILE GAS SERVICE CORPORATION


                           SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                  Percent of Voting                      State of
                Subsidiary                        Securities Owned                     Incorporation  
          ----------------------                --------------------                ------------------
 <S>                                                     <C>                             <C>
 MGS Energy Services, Inc.                               100%                            Alabama

 MGS Storage Services, Inc.                              100%                            Alabama

 MGS Marketing Services, Inc.                            100%                            Alabama
</TABLE>



               PARTNERSHIPS IN WHICH REGISTRANT OWNS AN INTEREST



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                 Partnership                        Equity Ownership  
           ----------------------                 --------------------
 <S>                                                       <C>
 Bay Gas Storage Company, Ltd.                             87.5%

 Southern Gas Transmission Co.                              51%
</TABLE>
#### Charles Douglas WARFEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C. Randall SCHNEIDER, in his personal capacity; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 00-15484.

D.C. No. CV-99-21061-RMW.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 14, 2001 *.

Decided May 30, 2001.

Before PREGERSON, FERNANDEZ, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Charles Douglas Warfel appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing as frivolous his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against a state court judge, Santa Clara County, and his public defender. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, *Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc.,*5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir.1993), and we affirm in part and dismiss in part.

Following the district court’s dismissal, Warfel filed a motion for relief from judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60, which the district court denied on December 13, 1999. On December 23, 1999, Warfel filed a second post-judgment motion for relief, which the district court denied on January 6, 2000. Warfel’s January 20, 2000, notice of appeal was timely as to the district court’s January 6, 2000 order, but not to the underlying judgment entered on November 22, 1999, or the district court’s December 13, 1999 order. *See Wages v. IRS,*915 F.2d 1230, 1234 n. 3 (9th Cir.1990). Therefore, we dismiss Warfel’s appeal from the underlying judgment and the December 13, 1999 order.

Because Warfel’s motion did not present adequate grounds for relief, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Warfel’s December 23, 1999 motion *566for post-judgment relief. *See Sch. Dist. No. 1J,*5 F.3d at 1263.

AFFIRMED in part and DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000068619
<NAME> MOUNTAIN STATES RECOURCES CORPORATION
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                                              11
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    11
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      11
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          892,675
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     78,946
<COMMON>                                     4,843,348
<OTHER-SE>                                 (5,814,958)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        11
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,636
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,636
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1505 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1505

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            November 14 (legislative day, November 13), 2023

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To modify the prohibition on recognition by United States courts of 
 certain rights relating to certain marks, trade names, or commercial 
                                 names.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``No Stolen Trademarks Honored in 
America Act of 2023''.

SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF PROHIBITION.

    Section 211 of the Department of Commerce and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, 1999 (as contained in section 101(b) of division A 
of Public Law 105-277; 112 Stat. 2681-88) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a)(2)--
                    (A) by inserting ``or entity of the executive 
                branch'' after ``U.S. court'';
                    (B) by striking ``by a designated national''; and
                    (C) by inserting before the period ``that was used 
                in connection with a business or assets that were 
                confiscated unless the original owner of the mark, 
                trade name, or commercial name, or the bonafide 
                successor-in-interest has expressly consented'';
            (2) in subsection (b)--
                    (A) by inserting ``or entity of the executive 
                branch'' after ``U.S. court''; and
                    (B) by striking ``by a designated national or its 
                successor-in-interest'';
            (3) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e);
            (4) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
    ``(d) Subsections (a)(2) and (b) of this section shall apply only 
if the person or entity asserting the rights knew or had reason to know 
at the time when the person or entity acquired the rights asserted that 
the mark, trade name, or commercial name was the same as or 
substantially similar to a mark, trade name, or commercial name that 
was used in connection with a business or assets that were 
confiscated.''; and
            (5) in subsection (e), as so redesignated, by striking ``In 
        this section:'' and all that follows through ``(2) The term'' 
        and inserting ``In this section, the term''.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 13, 2023.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Exhibit 4.15


 


CERTIFICATE OF TRUST

OF

ST. PAUL TRAVELERS CAPITAL TRUST III


 


THIS
Certificate of Trust of St. Paul Travelers Capital Trust III (the “Trust”) is
being duly executed as of June 28, 2004 and filed on behalf of the Trust
by each of the undersigned, as trustees, to form a statutory trust under the
Delaware Statutory Trust Act (12 Del. C. § 3801 et  seq.)
(the “Act”).


 


1.             Name.  The name of the statutory trust formed hereby
is St. Paul Travelers Capital Trust III.


 


2.             Delaware Trustee.  The name and business address of the trustee
of the Trust in the State of Delaware are:


 


Chase Manhattan Bank USA, National Association


c/o JP Morgan
Chase


500 Stanton Christiana Road, OPS4 / 3rd Floor


Newark, DE  19713


Attn:  Institutional Trust
Services.


 


3.             Effective Date.  This Certificate of Trust shall be effective
upon filing.


 


IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, each of the undersigned, as trustees of the Trust, have executed this
Certificate of Trust in accordance with Section 3811(a)(1) of
the Act.


 


	
   

  	
  CHASE
  MANHATTAN BANK USA, NATIONAL

  ASSOCIATION, as Delaware Trustee

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ John J.
  Cashin

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Name: John
  J. Cashin

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title: Vice
  President

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Bruce A.
  Backberg

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Name: Bruce A. Backberg, as Administrative

  Trustee
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4911 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

102 East Alexander Street in Three Rivers, Texas, as the ‘‘Private 

Felix Z. Longoria Veterans’ Memorial Post Office’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 22, 2004 

Mr. DOGGETT (for himself, Mr. ORTIZ, Mr. RODRIGUEZ, Mr. REYES, Mr. 

GONZALEZ, Mr. HINOJOSA, Mr. BELL, Mr. EDWARDS, Mr. FROST, Mr. 

GREEN of Texas, Mr. HALL, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Ms. EDDIE

BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. LAMPSON, Mr. SANDLIN, Mr. STENHOLM, Mr. THORNBERRY, Mr. TURNER of Texas, Mr. BACA, Mr. BECERRA, Mr. CARDOZA, Mr. FILNER, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Mrs. 

NAPOLITANO, Mr. PASTOR, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Ms. LINDA T. 

SA ́NCHEZ of California, Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California, Mr. 

SERRANO, Ms. SOLIS, Ms. VELA ́ZQUEZ, and Mr. MENENDEZ) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Government 

Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 102 East Alexander Street in Three Rivers, 

Texas, as the ‘‘Private Felix Z. Longoria Veterans’ Memorial Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 4911 IH 

1 SECTION 1. PRIVATE FELIX Z. LONGORIA VETERANS’ ME2 MORIAL POST OFFICE. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 102 East Alexander Street in 

5 Three Rivers, Texas, shall be known and designated as 

6 the ‘‘Private Felix Z. Longoria Veterans’ Memorial Post 

7 Office’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

10 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

11 be deemed to be a reference to the Private Felix Z. 

12 Longoria Veterans’ Memorial Post Office. 

Æ
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

GREGORY DEMETRUIS WEDLOW, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-1383

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed October 31, 2018.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P.

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court 

for Highlands County; Peter F. Estrada, 

Judge.

Gregory Demetruis Wedlow, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See State v. Matthews, 891 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 2004); Hughes v. 

State, 22 So. 3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Waiter v. State, 965 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 2d DCA 

2007); Vidak v. State, 793 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Haynes v. State, 106 So. 3d 

481 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013); Cooper v. State, 902 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).

CASANUEVA, CRENSHAW, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, PAUL J. EVANSON, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of MONONGAHELA POWER COMPANY.

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;

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

a) Designed such disclosure controls 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 others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant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 the registrant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 over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants
other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over 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 reasonably likely 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.



|                        |  |  |  |                            
|----------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------
|                        |  |  |  | /s/ Paul J. Evanson        
|                        |  |  |  | Paul J. Evanson            
|Date: February 27, 2007 |  |  |  | Principal Executive Officer
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I,             James E. Hohmann,certify that:

1.           I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Allstate Life Insurance Company of New York;

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

3.           Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, 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 othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls 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 tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

b)       Evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

c)        Disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.

5.           The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

a)        All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

b)       Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

May 7, 2007

/s/ James E.Hohmann

James E. Hohmann

President and Chief Executive Officer

 

E-3

----
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

ERIC KARL McCOY, DOC #051791, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-1906

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed March 22, 2019. 

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Polk 

County; Mark F. Carpanini, Judge.

Eric Karl McCoy, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

NORTHCUTT, SLEET, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
The Honorable George F. Gunn, Jr., United States District 1

Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

___________

No. 96-1569

___________

Nicky Harding, *

 *

Appellant, *

 *

v. * Appeal from the United States

 * District Court for the

Paul D. Caspari; Unknown * Eastern District of Missouri.

Ramacciotti; Keith Boyd; Mary *

Moore; James M. Ruman; Raif J. * [UNPUBLISHED]

Salfe; Correctional Medical *

Services; Shirley McClary, *

 *

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: September 4, 1996

 Filed: September 16, 1996

___________

Before BEAM, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Missouri inmate Nicky Harding appeals the district court's grant of 1

summary judgment in favor of defendants in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action.

After de novo review of the record and the parties' briefs, we conclude the

district court's grant of summary judgment was correct. Accordingly, we

affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

We deny appellant's motion for appointment of counsel.
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
BOBBY L. MAGWOOD,

Petitioner,

v.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, ET AL.,

Respondents.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-1399

Opinion filed September 26, 2014.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction.

Bobby L. Magwood, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Matthew Franklin Vitale, Assistant

Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits.

VAN NORTWICK, RAY, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., CONCUR.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-20-00129-CR

Christopher Joseph Downum

v.

The State of Texas

On Appeal from the

36th District Court of Aransas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. A-18-5163-CR

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

April 22, 2021