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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FILES AS PART OF
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           6,380
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   65,258
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,736
<INVENTORY>                                     85,985
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               169,626
<PP&E>                                         144,661
<DEPRECIATION>                                  82,764
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 263,531
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           76,842
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           857
<OTHER-SE>                                     163,591
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   263,531
<SALES>                                        434,358
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               434,358
<CGS>                                          290,900
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  125,385
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,213)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,652
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 15,634
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,236
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,398
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,398
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.26<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.26<F1>
<FN>
<F1>THE EARNINGS PER SHARE INFORMATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SFAS
NO. 128, AND BASIC AND DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE HAVE BEEN ENTERED IN PLACE OF
PRIMARY AND FULLY DILUTED RESPECTIVELY.
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Tirso CASTILLO-ARREOLA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-41267

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Nov. 8, 2006.

James Lee Turner, John Richard Berry, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Jon Karl Schmid, Law Office of Jon Karl Schmid, Brownsville, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Tirso Castillo-Arreola pleaded guilty of conspiracy to transport and harbor aliens within the United States and transporting aliens within the United States. The court sentenced him to the top of the guideline range, 105 months’ imprisonment on each count to run concurrently with each other but consecutively to his other sentences. The court stated that it adopted the flnd*482ings of the presentenee report and considered the evidence adduced at the trial of Castillo-Arreola’s co-defendants.

Castillo-Arreola argues that the court imposed the sentence without consideration of the sentencing factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3558(a). Because counsel raised no objection to the court’s statement of its justification or lack thereof for the sentence, we review only for plain error. *See United States v. Akpan,*407 F.3d 360, 368 (5th Cir.2005) (citations omitted).

The decision in *United States v. Mares,*402 F.3d 511 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 43, 163 L.Ed.2d 76 (2005), is dispositive. There we stated unequivocally that “[i]f the sentencing judge exercises her discretion to impose a sentence within a properly calculated Guideline range, in our reasonableness review we will infer that the judge has considered all the factors for a fair sentence set forth in the Guidelines.” *Id.*at 519. CastilloArreola does not argue that his sentence is unreasonable or that his guideline range was improperly calculated. Because the sentence is within the guideline range, we infer that the district court considered the § 3553 factors. *See Mares, id.; United States v. Izaguirre-Losoya,*219 F.3d 437, 440 (5th Cir.2000). Castillo-Arreola has failed to show plain error in his sentencing.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1996 AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR ENDED AS OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1996 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-28-1996
<CASH>                                         127,400
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   43,403
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     35,980
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               216,905
<PP&E>                                         288,856
<DEPRECIATION>                               (155,134)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 359,450
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           99,023
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,328
<OTHER-SE>                                     137,371
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   359,450
<SALES>                                        344,754
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               344,754
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  251,503
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                57,400
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,056
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 33,070
<INCOME-TAX>                                       852
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             32,218
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    32,218
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
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 of Arabian American Development Company (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Connie
Cook, Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:




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




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














/s/ Connie
Cook




Connie
Cook, Treasurer




March 13,
2009



















A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Career Opportunies

The Bureau of Land Management

Fire and Aviation Program offers many
career opportunities in both field and office
settings. Opportunities include working on fire
crews, such as fuels management, engine,
helicopter, and hand and hotshot crews, as well-as
smokejumping, heavy equipment operation,
dispatch, community outreach, and management.
With more than 3,000 employees in 52 district fire
programs throughout the western United States,
Alaska, and Mississippi, the BLM offers diverse
careers in locations that support an active,
outdoor lifestyle. More than a summer job; these

careers allow growth—from seasonal work to

senior leadership—with the BLM's Fire and
Aviation Program.
#### HERMAN DIAZ *v.*COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

(AC 25647)

Lavery, C. J., and DiPentima and Harper, Js.

Submitted on briefs May 27

officially released July 19, 2005

*Katharines. Goodbody,*special public defender, filed a brief for the appellant (petitioner).

*Matthew C. Gedansky,*state’s attorney, *Jessica Pro-bolus,*special deputy assistant state’s attorney, and *Angela R. Macchiarulo,*senior assistant state’s attorney, filed a brief for the appellee (respondent).

*Opinion*

PER CURIAM.

The habeas court dismissed the amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus that was filed by the petitioner, Herman Diaz. The petitioner claimed that his trial counsel rendered ineffective legal assistance and that he was actually innocent of the crimes of which he was convicted. The petitioner appeals following the court’s denial of his petition for certification to appeal. We dismiss the appeal.

We have reviewed both the issues raised by the petitioner in his amended petition and the court’s resolution of those issues. We conclude that the petitioner has not demonstrated that the issues raised are debatable among jurists of reason, that a court could resolve the issues in a different manner or that the questions raised *329deserve encouragement to proceed further. See *Lozada*v. *Deeds,*498 U.S. 430, 431-32, 111 S. Ct. 860, 112 L. Ed. 2d 956 (1991). Having failed to satisfy any of those criteria, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the court’s denial of his petition for certification to appeal reflects an abuse of discretion. See *Simms*v. *Warden,*230 Conn. 608, 616, 646 A.2d 126 (1994).

The appeal is dismissed.
Exhibit 32(m)

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

I, Joseph F. Domino, Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Entergy Texas, Inc. (the "Company"),certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





|(1) | The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and    
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods presented in the Report.









|/s/ Joseph F. DominoJoseph F. Domino
Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer of
Entergy Texas, Inc.
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:	February 27, 2009
#### Brian Flores-Vasquez et al., Respondents, v New York City Health & Hospitals Corporation (Jacobi Medical Center), Appellant.

[977 NYS2d 246]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas E. McKeon, J.), entered April 10, 2012, which granted plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a late notice of claim to the extent of granting infant plaintiff leave to file a new notice of claim within 30 days of entry of the order, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In determining if leave should be granted, the court must consider “whether the movant demonstrated a reasonable excuse for the failure to serve the notice of claim within the statutory time frame, whether the municipality acquired actual notice of the essential facts of the claim within 90 days after the claim arose or a reasonable time thereafter, and whether the delay would substantially prejudice the municipality in its defense” *(Matter of Dubowy v City of New York,*305 AD2d 320, 321 [1st Dept 2003]). Here, the motion court exercised its discretion in a provident manner in granting plaintiffs’ motion *{id.).*

*541The record shows that infant plaintiff was born at defendant hospital in June 2004 and that plaintiffs’ allegations of medical malpractice are based on the hospital’s treatment of plaintiff mother and the child both before and after delivery. Plaintiffs did not serve a notice of claim on defendant until September 2006 and did not move to deem the notice timely or for leave to file a late notice of claim until June 2010.

Although plaintiffs failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for the delay, “the lack of a reasonable excuse is not, standing by itself, sufficient to deny an application for leave to serve and file a late notice of claim” *(Matter of Ansong v City of New York,*308 AD2d 333, 334 [1st Dept 2003]). Plaintiffs submitted expert affidavits showing that defendant had actual knowledge of the facts underlying their theory of a departure from the accepted standard of pediatric care with regard to the diagnosis and treatment of the child’s fetal distress and the existence of a causally related injury, and their opinions are not refuted by defendant’s pediatric defense expert *(see Alvarez v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. [North Cent. Bronx Hosp.],*101 AD3d 464 [1st Dept 2012]; *Perez v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.,*81 AD3d 448 [1st Dept 2011]). Moreover, defendant is not substantially prejudiced by the delay as infant plaintiffs injury was apparent at his birth and documented in the medical records, which have been in the hospital’s possession since the time of the alleged malpractice *(see Bayo v Burnside Mews Assoc.,*45 AD3d 495 [1st Dept 2007]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.R, Sweeny, Moskowitz, Freedman and Clark, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
BALANCE SHEET AS OF JANUARY 31,1998 AND AUDITED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE
YEAR THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH ANNUAL
REPORT ON  FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 31, 1998
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-02-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1998
<CASH>                                           8,594
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      550
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     23,747
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                35,564
<PP&E>                                          69,711
<DEPRECIATION>                                (17,456)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  87,837
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,874
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        98,573
<OTHER-SE>                                    (29,637)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    87,837
<SALES>                                        114,591
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               114,591
<CGS>                                           73,846
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   50,443
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   397
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 5,800
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (315)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (15,895)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (15,895)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (15,895)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.20)
        

</TABLE>
### M A N D A T E

TO THE 138TH DISTRICT COURT of CAMERON COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas, on the 9th day of April,

2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

ABRAHAM PARRA, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS Appellee.

CAUSE NO. 13-13-00490-CR (Tr.Ct.No. 2012-DCR-2912- B)

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal,

concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed as modified by this

Court. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

      

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals

for the Thirteenth District of Texas, in this behalf, and in all things have it duly

recognized, obeyed and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Rogelio Valdez, Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals, with the seal

thereof affixed, at the City of Edinburg, Texas this 10th day of December, 2015.

Dorian E. Ramirez, CLERK
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C.§1350, as adopted pursuant to

§906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Annual Report of Hemagen Diagnostics, Inc., the
Company, on Form 10-K for the period ending September 30, 2009, (the Report), I, William P. Hales, 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:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  |  |  |                                      
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: December 18, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/    WILLIAM P.
HALES              
|                        |  |  |  | William P. Hales                     
|                        |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32 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 of LipidViro Tech, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Thomas J. Howells, President and Chief Executive Officer and Shelley Goff, Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


|      |                |  |     |                                                         
|----- | -------------- |  | --- | --------------------------------------------------------
|Date: | March 23, 2011 |  | By: | /s/Thomas J. Howells                                    
|      |                |  |     | Thomas J. Howells, President and Chief Executive Officer




|      |                |  |     |                        
|----- | -------------- |  | --- | -----------------------
|Date: | March 23, 2011 |  | By: | /s/Shelley Goff        
|      |                |  |     | Shelley Goff, Treasurer
P-0. Box 1 I0 Miami, OK 74355 

National lndian Gaming Commission 

1441 L St NW, Suite 9100 

Washington, DC 20005 August 15,2013 

Re: Comments on Classification of "Electronic One Touch Bingo System," 78 Fed. 

Reg. 37998 

The Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma ('Tribe") supports the National lndian Gaming 

Commission's proposed classification of "server based electronic bingo system 

games that can be played utilizing only one touch of a button ('one touch bingo')" 

as Class II games under the lndian Gaming Regulatory Act ["IGRA"). We believe 

that this proposed classification is fully consistent with IGRA as well as with 

applicable regulation and case law. 

The Tribe agrees with the Commission that a one touch system or other 

automatic daubing feature does not somehow prevent a game from qualifying as 

Class II bingo when the game satisfies the statutory requirements of bingo as set 

forth in IGRA. in the Act, Congress provided the necessary test to distinguish 

electronically-aided Class II games from Class Ill games, and that test was not 

based on the number of touches required to interact with the game. 

Based on our review of the proposed classification, the Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma 

is pleased to support the National lndian Gaming Commission's proposal as a valid 

and useful clarification on the subject of electronic one touch bingo systems. 

Chief
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 of Angelica Corporation (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 29, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Stephen
M. O’Hara, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 (1)
    The
      Report 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)); and
 
 (2)
    The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.
 
 
 
 
 
 /s/
      Stephen M.
      O’HaraStephen
      M. O’HaraPresident
      and Chief ExecutiveOfficer
      of Angelica CorporationApril
      14, 2005