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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         1329031
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   320250
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1649281
<PP&E>                                        21323389
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                25808134
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2574552
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    22924782
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  25808134
<SALES>                                         484130
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                846577
<CGS>                                           320961
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    29492
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                129850
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 366274
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             366274
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    366274
<EPS-BASIC>                                      12.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    12.33


</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

ROSARIO CARTWRIGHT AND ISHMAEL CARTWRIGHT , Appellant s , V.
FAVIOLA A RACELI A RMENDARIZ , Appellee. §

§ § § § § § No. 08

- 1 6

- 00 129

- CV

Appeal from the
1 43rd District Court
of Ward C ounty, Texas (TC# 14

- 09

- 23446

- CVW )

MEMORANDUM OPINION This appeal is before us to determine whether we have jurisdiction. Finding that Appellant s , Rosario Cartwright and Ishmael Cartwright , did not timely file their notice of appeal, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. A civil appeal is perfected when the notice of appeal is timely filed. T EX .R.A PP .P. 25.1, 26.1; see Restrepo v. First National Bank of Dona Ana County, N.M ., 892 S.W.2d 237, 238 (Tex.App.

-- El Paso 1995, no writ). If the notice of appeal is untimely, the appellate court lacks jurisdiction and must dismiss the case. See Charette v. Fitzgerald , 213 S.W.3d 505, 509 (Tex.App

. -- Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, no pet.). In an ordinary civil case, the notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after the judgment or appealable order is signed or within 90 days if any party timely files a motion for new trial, motion to modify the judgment, motion to reinstate- 2

-

under T EX .R.C IV .P. 165a, or makes a request for findings of fact and conclusions of law.
T EX .R.A PP .P. 26.1(a). The appellate court may extend the time to file the notice of appeal if, within fifteen days after the deadline p asses, the appellant files (1) the notice of appeal in the trial court and (2) a motion for extension of time complying with Rule 10.5(b). T EX .R.A PP .P. 26.3;

see T EX .R.A PP .P. 10.5(b); Verburgt v. Dorner , 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997).
The trial court e ntered the final judgment on March 10, 2016. A motion for new trial must be filed no later than thirty days after the judgment or order complained of is signed.
T EX .R.C IV .P. 329b(a). Thus, the motion for new trial was due to be filed on April 9, 2016, a Saturday. Under Rule 4.1, the deadline for filing the motion for new trial was extended to Monday, April 11, 2016. See T EX .R.A PP .P. 4.1(a). Appellants did not file their motion for new trial until April 12, 2016, one day late. Consequently, their noti ce of appeal was due to be filed April 11, 2016 (thirty days after the trial court signed the judgment), but Appellants did not file their notice of appeal until June 9, 2016. Because Appellants failed to timely file their notice of appeal, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

September 14, 2016 YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 116 (Thursday, June 18, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 28937]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14306]



[[Page 28937]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health


Decision To Evaluate a Petition To Designate a Class of Employees 
for the Lake Ontario Ordnance Works, Niagara Falls, New York, To Be 
Included in the Special Exposure Cohort

AGENCY: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: HHS gives notice as required by 42 CFR 83.12(e) of a decision 
to evaluate a petition to designate a class of employees for the Lake 
Ontario Ordnance Works, Niagara Falls, New York, to be included in the 
Special Exposure Cohort under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 
Compensation Program Act of 2000. The initial proposed definition for 
the class being evaluated, subject to revision as warranted by the 
evaluation, is as follows:
    Facility: Lake Ontario Ordnance Works.
    Location: Niagara Falls, New York.
    Job Titles and/or Job Duties: All employees of the Department of 
Energy, its predecessor agencies, and their contractors and 
subcontractors.
    Period of Employment: January 1, 1944 through December 31, 1953.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Elliott, Director, Office of 
Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for Occupational 
Safety and Health (NIOSH), 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46, Cincinnati, 
OH 45226, Telephone 513-533-6800 (this is not a toll-free number). 
Information requests can also be submitted by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7d323e3c2e3d3e393e533a322b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="29666a687a696a6d6a076e667f">[email protected]</span></a>.

 Christine M. Branche,
Acting Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E9-14306 Filed 6-17-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-19-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[973 NE2d 179, 950 NYS2d 84]

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Danny Martin, Appellant.

Decided June 26, 2012

*915APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP,*New York City *(Mei Lin KwanGett*and *James F. Caputo*of counsel), and *Legal Aid Society of New York (Denise Fabiano*and *Steven Banks*of counsel) for appellant.

*Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney,*New York City *(Jared Wolkowitz*and *Sheila O’Shea*of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed *(see People v De Bour,*40 NY2d 210 [1976]). Whether Detective Barnes *916had a founded suspicion to approach defendant, or probable cause to arrest him involve mixed questions of law and fact, beyond our review if the determination is supported by the record. Because such record evidence exists here, the issues are beyond further review by this Court.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed in a memorandum.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>        5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated balance sheets and consolidated statements of operations and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>     1,000
       
<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<CASH>                                      7,973
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                              77,126
<ALLOWANCES>                                2,904
<INVENTORY>                                 1,822
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          129,477
<PP&E>                                     29,927
<DEPRECIATION>                             17,700
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            380,730
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     197,082
<BONDS>                                   304,766
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                       66
<OTHER-SE>                              (119,878)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              380,730
<SALES>                                   110,274
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          110,274
<CGS>                                      96,773
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              96,773
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            3,996
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          6,022
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (11,428)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  245
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      (11,673)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                             (11,673)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                               (.35)
<EPS-DILUTED>                               (.25)
        



</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 29706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14658]



[[Page 29706]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special 
Emphasis Panel (SEP): Annual Estimates of Influenza Vaccine 
Effectiveness for Preventing Laboratory Confirmed Influenza in the 
United States, Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) IP08-00101SUPP10, 
Initial Review

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) announces the aforementioned meeting.

    Time and Date: 1 p.m.-3 p.m., August 12, 2009 (Closed).
    Place: Teleconference.
    Status: The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance 
with provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(4) and (6), Title 5 
U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management Analysis 
and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.
    Matters To Be Discussed: The meeting will include the initial 
review, discussion, and evaluation of ``Annual Estimates of 
Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness for Preventing Laboratory Confirmed 
Influenza in the United States, FOA IP08-00101SUPP10.''
    For More Information Contact: Gregory Anderson, M.P.H., M.S., 
CDC, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., Mailstop E60, Atlanta, GA 30333, 
Telephone: (404) 498-2275.
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining 
to announcements of meetings and other committee management 
activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and 
Disease Registry.

    Dated: June 12, 2009.
Elaine L. Baker,
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. E9-14658 Filed 6-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 1**  **0 -**  **69 3**  **1**

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appell ee ,
v. SEAN ANTHONY ROBINSON, a/k/a Black , Defendant

– Appell ant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Ea stern District of Virginia , at R ichmond
. Henry E. Hudson , District Judge. ( 3 :0 6

- c r - 002 04

- HEH

- 1 )

Submitted : October 19 , 2010 Decided: October 28, 2010

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judge s .
Dismiss ed by un published per curia m opinion
. Sean Anthony Robinson , Appellant Pro Se. Gurney Wingate Grant, II , Roderick Charles Young, Assistant United States Attorney s , Richmond , Virginia , for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
S ean Anthony Robinson seeks to appeal the district
court’s order granting his motion to hold his 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction of sentence in abeyance pending a Supreme Court decision
. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over fin al orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (200 6 ), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1292 (200 6 ); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 , 545

- 46 (1949). Because the district court has not yet issued a dispos itive order on Robinson’s
§ 3582(c)(2) motion, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process. DISMISSED
[982 NE2d 81, 958 NYS2d 319]

#### Musa Callistro, an Infant, by His Mother and Natural Guardian, Jessica Rivera, Appellant, v Michael W. Bebbington, M.D., et al., Respondents.

Decided December 11, 2012

*946APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Law Offices of Fitzgerald & Fitzgerald, P.C.,*Yonkers *(John M. Daly*of counsel), for appellant.

*Heidell, Pittoni, Murphy & Bach, LLP,*New York City *(Daniel S. Ratner*of counsel), for respondents.

OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question not answered on the ground that it is unnecessary. Plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact concerning whether defendants’ alleged malpractice in failing to perform a caesarean section rather than a vaginal delivery was the cause of the child’s alleged cognitive, receptive, and expressive deficits and developmental disability.

Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith and Pigott.
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 237 

Expressing support for designation of March 21, 2019, as ‘‘National Rosie 

the Riveter Day’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 14, 2019 

Mr. HUFFMAN (for himself, Mr. KHANNA, Mr. THOMPSON of California, Mr. 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE of Pennsylvania, Mrs. TORRES of California, Ms. 

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Ms. MCCOLLUM, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mrs. DINGELL, Mr. MOULTON, Mr. SMITH of Washington, Mr. 

COHEN, Mr. BARR, Mr. DESAULNIER, Ms. SPEIER, Mr. FITZPATRICK, 

Ms. TITUS, and Mr. SWALWELL of California) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for designation of March 21, 2019, as 

‘‘National Rosie the Riveter Day’’. 

Whereas ‘‘National Rosie the Riveter Day’’ is a collective national effort to raise awareness of the 16 million women 

working during World War II; 

Whereas Americans have chosen to honor female workers who 

contributed on the home front during World War II; 

Whereas these women left their homes to work or volunteer 

full-time in factories, farms, shipyards, airplane factories, 

banks, and other institutions in support of the military 

overseas; 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 237 IH 

Whereas these women worked with the USO and Red Cross, 

drove trucks, riveted airplane parts, collected critical materials, rolled bandages, and served on rationing boards; 

Whereas it is fitting and proper to recognize and preserve the 

history and legacy of working women, including volunteer 

women, during World War II to promote cooperation and 

fellowship among such women and their descendants; 

Whereas these women and their descendants wish to further 

the advancement of patriotic ideas, excellence in the 

workplace, and loyalty to the United States of America; 

and 

Whereas March 21, 2019, during Women’s History Month, 

would be an appropriate date to designate as ‘‘National 

Rosie the Riveter Day’’: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the designation of ‘‘National Rosie 

3 the Riveter Day’’; and 

4 (2) acknowledges the important role played by 

5 women in World War II. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
|   | (1)    | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 result of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Report. |

|   |   | July 13, 2012                         |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                  |
|   |   | By: /s/ Ray Singleton                 |
|   |   |                                  |
|   |   | Ray Singleton                         |
|   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

TO THE 406TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF WEBB COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas on June 17, 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise

or reverse your judgment between

Jose Isabel Martinez Hernandez, Appellant(s)

V.

The State of Texas, Appellee(s)

No. 04-13-00820-CR and Tr. Ct. No. 2012CRU010-D4

was determined, and therein our Court of Appeals made its order in these words:

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s

judgment is AFFIRMED.

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

District of Texas, in this behalf and in all things have the order duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

Witness the Hon. Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas,

with the seal of the Court affixed and the City of San Antonio on August 17, 2015.

KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK

Cynthia A. Martinez

Deputy Clerk, Ext. 53853
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 117 (Friday, June 19, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 29214]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14502]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


National Toxicology Program (NTP); Office of Liaison, Policy and 
Review; Meeting of the Scientific Advisory Committee on Alternative 
Toxicological Methods (SACATM): Amended Notice

AGENCY: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), 
National Institutes of Health (NIH).

ACTION: Availability of public video casting of meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of public video casting 
of the SACATM meeting on June 25-26, 2009. The meeting will be held at 
the Hilton Arlington Hotel, 950 North Stafford Street, Arlington, VA 
22203 and video cast through a link on the SACATM Web site (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/7441). Information regarding the meeting was 
announced in the Federal Register (74 FR 19562) published on April 29, 
2009 and available on the NTP Web site (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/32822).

DATES: The SACATM meeting will be held on June 25 and 26, 2009. The 
meeting is scheduled from 8:30 a.m. to approximately 5:30 p.m. on June 
25 and 8:30 a.m. until adjournment on June 26, 2009

ADDRESSES: The SACATM meeting will be held at the Hilton Arlington 
Hotel, 950 North Stafford Street, Arlington, VA 22203 [hotel: (703) 
528-6000)].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Archived Video of the Meeting

    Following the meeting, the archived video of the meeting will be 
available on the SACATM meeting Web page (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/7441).

    Dated: June 12, 2009.
John R. Bucher,
Associate Director, National Toxicology Program.
[FR Doc. E9-14502 Filed 6-18-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**800 KA 12-02113**  PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CENTRA, CARNI, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JAKOTA W. BARNES, ALSO KNOWN AS “KNEES,” DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (ROBERT L. KEMP OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

FRANK A. SEDITA, III, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (DAVID A. HERATY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Penny M. Wolfgang, J.), rendered July 13, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the case is held, the decision is reserved and the matter is remitted to Supreme Court, Erie County, for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]). As the People correctly concede, Supreme Court erred in failing to determine whether defendant, an apparently eligible youth, was eligible for youthful offender status. Indeed, there was no mention at the plea proceeding whether he would be afforded youthful offender treatment. “Upon conviction of an eligible youth, the court must order a [presentence] investigation of the defendant. After receipt of a written report of the investigation and at the time of pronouncing sentence the court must determine whether or not the eligible youth is a youthful offender” (CPL 720.20 [1]). A sentencing court must determine whether to grant youthful offender status to every defendant who is eligible for it because, inter alia, “[t]he judgment of a court as to which young people have a real likelihood of turning their lives around is just too valuable, both to the offender and to the community, to be sacrificed in plea bargaining” ( People v Rudolph , 21 NY3d 497, 501).

We therefore hold the case, reserve decision and remit the matter to Supreme Court to make and state for the record a determination**-2- 800 KA 12-02113** 

whether defendant should be afforded youthful offender status.

Entered: July 3, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court