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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF 1934 FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1996.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                                         199,183
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,633
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 206,816
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     (164,609)
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   206,816
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,266
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,730
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,472
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,936)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,936)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,936)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)
<FN>
<F1>REGISTRANT HAS AN UNCLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

RANNY L. JOHNSON, )

Petitioner, )

vs. ) Civil Action 07-0188-KD-B

JOHN CUMMINGS, et al, )

Respondents. )

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the

issues raised, and there having been no objections filed, the recommendation of the Magistrate

Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(B) and dated February 26, 2010, is ADOPTED as the

opinion of this Court. 

DONE this March 25, 2010. 

 s/ Kristi K. DuBose 

KRISTI K. DuBOSE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00188-KD-B Document 26 Filed 03/25/10 Page 1 of 1
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 5- 19 48

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Ja so n Har ris
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.
Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rn Dis tri ctof Ark an sa s - Hel en a

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: May 2, 20 16 Fi le d: May 13, 2 01 6 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re LOKEN, BYE, an d KELLY, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

Fed eral in m at e Ja so n Har ris bro ug ht an act io n un de r th e Fed eral Tort Cl ai m s Act al le gi ng th at , aft er he in jure d hi s fin ge r in a cel l do or at th e Fo rres t Ci ty Med iu m Fed eral Co rrec ti on al In st it ut io n, an em erg en cy ro om ph y si ci an reco m m en de d te nd on rep ai r wit hi n two week s, y et hi s sc he du le d co ns ul ta ti on wit h an of fs it e or th op aed is twas no t u nt il 18 da y s la te r. Afte r a be nc h tri al , t he di st ric t co ur t en te red jud gm en t 1 in fav or of th e Uni te d St at es , co nc lu di ng th at Harri s pr es en te d “ no ev id en ce to sh ow th at th e de la y was cau se d by an y of th e Defen da nt ’s em pl oyees, or th at it affe ct ed [th e
or th op aed is t’s] di ag no si s.” Har ris ap pe al s.

Harri s ’s s o l e arg um en t fo r rev ers al is th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in ap pl y in g th e m ed ic al ne gl ig en ce st an da rd of care in th e Ark an sa s Med ic al Mal pr act ic e Act , se e Ark

. Co de A n n
. § 16 -1 14 -2 02 , rat he r th an th e st an da rd fo r or di na ry ne gl ig en ce. Howev er, th e as se rte d erro r di d no t affe ct Harri s’s su bs ta nt ia l rig ht s. See Fed

. R. Ci v. P. 61

. Befo re tri al , th e di st ric t co ur t de te rm in ed th at th e ne gl ig en ce as se rte d by Harri s
was wit hi n th e co ur t’s co m p reh en si on as a m at te r of co m m on kn owl ed ge , an d t he refo re th e Ark an sa s Med ic al Mal pr act ic e Act di d no t req ui re Harri s t o p r o v e
ne gl ig en ce by m ean s of ex pe rt te st im on y
. See Ark

. Co de Ann

. § 16 -1 14 -2 06

. Afte r tri al , th e co ur t co nc lu de d th at Harri s fai le d to pr ov e th at an y em pl oyee of de fen da nt
cau se d th e de la y ed di ag no si s, so th e co ur t di d no t reac h th e qu es ti on of wha t st an da rd of care wou ld ap pl y

if a m ed ic al pro vi de r ha d c au se d t he de la y
.
Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm . See 8 th Cir . R. 47 B.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

The Hon or ab le J e r o m e T. Kearn ey , Uni te d St at es Mag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e 1 East ern Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s, to who m th e cas e was refe rred fo r fin al di sp os it io n by
co ns en t o f th e p art ie s p ur su an t t o 2 8 U.S.C. § 63 6( c).
-2

-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-04-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-07-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-04-2000
<CASH>                                       2,701,464
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               16,513,292
<ALLOWANCES>                                   114,661
<INVENTORY>                                 25,025,421
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            51,306,308
<PP&E>                                      50,711,772
<DEPRECIATION>                              14,926,953
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             164,726,663
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       14,902,969
<BONDS>                                    115,164,922
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     5,781,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  25,752,172
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               164,726,663
<SALES>                                    185,598,196
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           185,598,196
<CGS>                                      116,024,983
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              184,179,420
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,661,893
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               353,677
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          14,985,577
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (19,059,735)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 4,825,168
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (14,234,567)
<DISCONTINUED>                               9,630,093
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (52,350)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (4,656,824)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.80)


</TABLE>
10981.

#### Tenenbaum *v.*Knight.

Decided June 15, 1920.

Action on contract; from city court of Reidsville—-Judge Cowart. September 1, 1919.

*E. C. Elmore,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. T. Grice,*contra.

Per Curiam.

“ Under the provisions of the act approved August 17, 1915 (Acts 1915, p. 117), entitled ‘An act to amend an aet establishing the city court of Reidsville/ relative to the selection of jurors, the number of jurors, etc., the city court of Reidsville is not a court from which a writ of error will lie directly to the Supreme Court or to the Court of Appeals. *Ash*v. *People’s Bank of Oliver,*149 *Ga.*713 (101 S. E. 912).” *Kennedy*v. *Kicklighter,*150 *Ga.*276 (103 S. E. 153). Consequently the writ of error in this case must be

*Dismissed.*

*Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth and Luke, JJ., concur.*
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of Huntsman Corporation and Huntsman International LLC (the
"Companies") for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter R. Huntsman, Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:



/s/ PETER R. HUNTSMAN Peter R. Huntsman Chief Executive OfficerFebruary 26, 2009


---



QuickLinks
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

In connectionwith the Quarterly Report of California Coastal Communities, Inc. (the  “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period endedJune 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Raymond J. Pacini, Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on my knowledge:

 

1.               TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.               Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: August 7, 2003 | */s/   Raymond J. Pacini* |   |
|----------------------|--------------------------------|--------|
|                 | Raymond J. Pacini              |
|                 | Chief Executive Officer        |

 

 

In accordance with clause (ii)of Item 601(b)(32), the above certification (A) shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, and(B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing underthe Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended, except to the extent that the Company explicitly incorporates it byreference in any such filing.

 

----
Description 

Problem

A wide variety of instruments exist to measure 

voltage. These instruments must be calibrated to 

provide accurate measurements. In the field of ac 

and dc metrology, instruments are devised to 

provide exact measurements of voltage so that 

other instruments can be calibrated to them. The 

Josephson junction has been utilized in metrology 

to take advantage of its quantum mechanical 

characteristics where time-integrated areas of 

every generated voltage pulse are exactly the same 

regardless of the shape of the pulse. For example, a 

highly accurate voltage source utilizing Josephson 

technology exists for unipolar ac and dc voltages 

that control pulses of a single polarity. However, an 

instrument is needed to produce a highly accurate 

bipolar voltage source for calibration and other 

purposes.

Invention

This invention solves this problem. It is a 

Josephson circuit that provides accurate, stable, 

arbitrary waveform generation with a predetermined frequency spectrum. It will enable the 

synthesis of both ac and dc bipolar waveforms 

where voltage pulses of both positive and negative 

polarity are precisely controlled and used to 

increase the output voltage.

Contact

Technology Partnerships Office (TPO) 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

TPO@NIST.GOV 

Benefits

Commercial Application

Generation of digitally synthesized ac signals 

with calculable rms voltages

Characterization of digital-to-analog and analogto-digital converters

Calibration of dc and ac reference standards 

and voltmeters

Synthesis of low-phase-noise radar signals

Competitive Advantage

Eliminates voltage, phase, and timing variations 

that prevent metrological accuracy

AC and DC bipolar voltage source using 

quantized pulses, Patent 6,236,344

Ref. No. 98-026

Circuit of Invention
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

 SOUTHERN DIVISION

SHANESTA TAITE LEWIS, : 

Petitioner, : 

v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-00430-WS-N 

WARDEN CYNTHIA WHEELER-WHITE, : 

Respondent. : 

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the issue 

raised, and there having been no objections filed, the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge 

made under 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. It is 

ORDERED that Petitioner=s petition for habeas corpus relief is hereby DENIED.

The court further finds that Petitioner is not entitled to a certificate of appealability. 

DONE this 29th day of July, 2010. 

s/WILLIAM H. STEELE 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:09-cv-00430-WS-N Document 16 Filed 07/29/10 Page 1 of 1
11475.

#### Dillard *v.*The State.

Decided June 15, 1920.

Indictment for larceny; from Bibb superior court — Judge Mathews. March 22, 1920.

The larceny of an automobile was charged in the indictment. It was testified that the car disappeared from its owner’s possession in Bibb county, without his knowledge or consent, and soon after was discovered, with the defendant and an older boy in it, in Barnesville; and that the defendant made conflicting statements as to how they got the car. One of his statements was that they started to Atlanta afoot, and a white men asked them where they were going, and turned the car over to them, telling them to take it and go ahead; another statement was that the other boy suggested that they get a car, and later drove up^ in this car, and they got in it and started to Atlanta. As to possession of stolen goods the court charged the jury as follows: “ I charge you that where one of the circumstances proven in the case is that the defendant is in possession of stolen goods, the jury may presume from that fact that the defendant is guilty, unless a reasonable ’explanation, in the opinion of the jury, is shown, as to such possession. Now, if you believe, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this defendant was found in possession of the car, the jury may pre*403sume from tliat circumstance alone tbat he is guilty of larceny of the ear, where other proof in the case shows that the ear was stolen. This is not a conclusive presumption, but it is a presumption that may be rebutted. It is for the jury to say when such a conclusive presumption arises, unless it is rebutted. But I charge you, as a matter of law, the jury may presume from that circumstance, if such a circumstance is shown in the case, the jury may presume it and act upon it unless it is rebutted by showing a reasonable explanation as to such possession.” In the motion for a new trial it is alleged that the court erred in so charging, for the reason that the effect of this part of the charge was to instruct the jury that if they found the defendant in possession of the automobile, they might find him guilty on that fact alone; that the charge was not justified by the evidence, which showed that two negroes were in the car when found; that it was error because the jury might find that the defendant was using the car without the owner’s consent and was not guilty of stealing it; and it was error because it put an undue burden on the defendant and took away from the State its duty of proving him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

*402Luke, J.

The charge of the court upon the question of recent possession of stolen goods, as complained of, was not erroneous for the reason stated in *Cuthbert*v. *State,*3 *Ga. App.*600 (60 S. E. 322). See *Jackson*v. *State,*25 *Ga. App.*16 (102 S. E. 373). The charge of the court was full and fair, and the’evidence amply authorized, if indeed it did not almost demand, the conviction of the defendant. It was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.*

*403
      *H. F.*Rawls, for plaintiff in error.

*C. H.*Garrett, *solicitor-general,*contra.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1497 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1497

To provide that, for a 3-year period, applications for the exportation 
    of natural gas to member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty 
 Organization be granted without modification or delay, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 9, 2023

Mrs. Fletcher introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide that, for a 3-year period, applications for the exportation 
    of natural gas to member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty 
 Organization be granted without modification or delay, and for other 
                               purposes.

    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 ``American Gas for Allies Act''.

SEC. 2. TEMPORARY TREATMENT OF CERTAIN APPLICATIONS FOR THE EXPORTATION 
              OF NATURAL GAS.

    (a) In General.--During the period described in subsection (c) of 
this section, for purposes of section 3(a) of the Natural Gas Act (15 
U.S.C. 717b(a)), the exportation of natural gas to a foreign country 
described in subsection (b) of this section shall be deemed to be 
consistent with the public interest, and applications for such 
exportation shall be granted without modification or delay.
    (b) Foreign Countries.--A foreign country described in this 
subsection is--
            (1) a member country of the North Atlantic Treaty 
        Organization; or
            (2) any other foreign country, if the Secretary of State, 
        in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary 
        of Energy, determines that exportation of natural gas to that 
        foreign country would promote the national security interests 
        of the United States.
    (c) Applicability.--This section shall apply with respect to 
applications for the authorization to export natural gas under section 
3 of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717b) to a foreign country 
described in subsection (b) of this section that are pending on the 
date of enactment of this Act, or filed during the period that begins 
on such date of enactment and ends on the date that is 3 years after 
such date of enactment.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Sean M. Cary, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Willamette Valley Vineyards Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly
period ended June 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of Willamette Valley Vineyards Inc.

Date: August 13, 2004
/s/ Sean M. Cary
    Sean M. Cary
    Chief Financial Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

GLYNIS BETHEL, :

Plaintiff, :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 10-0099-KD-M

SHERIFF HUEY MACK, :

Defendant. :

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the issues

raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which

objection is made, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(A) and dated May 13, 2010 is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. 

It is ORDERED that this action be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice for lack

of subject matter jurisdiction. 

DONE and ORDERED this the 3rd day of June 2010. 

/s/ Kristi K. DuBose 

KRISTI K. DuBOSE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-00099-KD-M Document 9 Filed 06/03/10 Page 1 of 1
This expression scan 

sampleThetaMotor (A3) 

in increments of 5 from -

39 to 321.

At each increment is 

counts 270s. Then, it goes 

back to main loop and 

steps 1.
TELEWORK SECURITY 

OVERVIEW & TIP GUIDE

26 Million+

Americans work 

remotely 43 % of Americans work 

from home at least 

occasionally 82 % of workers want to 

work from home at 

least 1 day per week

8 Million people worked 

completely at home in 

2017

115 % increase

in the remote workforce 57 between 2005 and 2015

% of workers want to 

work from home at 

least 3 days per week

42 % of those with an 

advanced degree 

perform some work 

from home

6 BASIC TIPS*

1. Find out if your organization has rules or policies 

for telework and make sure you comply. 

2. Protect your computer communications from 

eavesdropping. If you use Wi-Fi at home, make sure 

your network is set up securely. Specifically, look to 

see if it is using “WPA2” or “WPA3” security, and 

make sure your password is hard to guess.

3 If your organization has a VPN (virtual private 

network), use that on your telework device for 

stronger protection. If not, consider using your own 

VPN—you can find numerous providers online.

4. If you’re using your own computer or mobile device 

(something not issued by your organization) for telework, 

make sure you’ve enabled basic security features. Simply 

enabling the password, PIN, fingerprint, or facial ID feature 

will prevent people from getting on your device should you 

walk away from it. Any PIN or password you use should be 

hard to guess.

5. Keep your computers and mobile devices patched and 

updated. Most provide an option to check and install 

updates automatically. Enabling that option can be a good 

idea if you don’t want to check for updates periodically.

6. If you’re seeing unusual or suspicious activity on any 

device you’re using to telework (computer, mobile device, or 

home network) ask for help—better safe than sorry. Contact 

your organization’s help desk or security operations center 

to report the activity.

Statistics sourced from the 

U.S. Bureau of Labor and 

Statistics and a CNBC 

article from 2019.

*This list is not 

all-inclusive nor 

must you follow 

this order; 

select the 

measures that 

suit your needs