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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                       2,278,982
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   81,956
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      59,851,737
<DEPRECIATION>                              13,633,386
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              48,773,131
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  21,513,860
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                48,773,131
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,276,734
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,094,869
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,134,420
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (267,510)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (267,510)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (267,510)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (4.38)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the
accompanying Annual Report of Dreams, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dorothy
Sillano, Principal Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge, 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 fully presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



|    |  |                            
|--- |  | ---------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Dorothy Sillano        
|    |  | Dorothy Sillano            
|    |  | Principal Financial Officer
|    |  | March 30, 2011
NO. 06-15-00049-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS, 6th DISTRICT

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

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

KELLY RAY TADLOCK, 

Appellant,

VS.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee,

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

Appealed from No. 1424225

the 8th District Court Hopkins County, Texas

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

SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION 

OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT’S BRIEF

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

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THE SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS:

COMES NOW, KELLY RAY TADLOCK, DEFENDANT, through his 

attorney and files this Second Motion for Extension of time to file his Appellate 

Brief and would show in support thereof: 

1. Appellant was convicted of the offense of Indecency with a Child, in a trial to 

the court and sentenced to 20 years TDCJ 

2. The reporter’s record was file timely making the Appellant’s Brief due on 4 

June 2015

3. This is Appellant’s second request for a extension of time to file, the brief is 

ACCEPTED

06-15-00049-CR

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

7/10/2015 9:48:29 PM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 7/13/2015 8:08:00 AM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
2

being filed concurrently with this Motion. 

4. The State has no opposition to the granting of this Motion

5. Counsel is appointed trial counsel in the re-trial of The State of Texas v. Roy 

Dean Duffey, reversed by this Honorable Court; set for 8 June 2015. As a result of 

preparation for that trial the undersigned has not been able to dedicate the time to 

fully researching the legal issues in the instant case and requests an extension of 60 

days; Counsel has been preparing the Motion for New Trial in the Duffey matter, 

and researching the law in the instant case. 

Wherefore, Defendant prays this court grant him leave to file the Appellants 

brief concurrent with this Motion and for such other relief to which he may be 

entitled. 

Respectfully submitted,

 ___/s/_Frank R. Hughes_

FRANK R. HUGHES

Attorney at Law

P. O. Box 8145

Greenville, Texas 75404
3

(903)456-2703

State Bar No.: 10236500

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on June 3, 2015, a true and correct copy of the foregoing 

document was delivered to counsel of record, set out below. 

/s/Frank R. Hughes 

FRANK R. HUGHES 

Will Ramsay, 

District Attorney 8th Judicial District 

110 Main St.

Sulphur Springs, TX 75482

Email:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                              68
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,749
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,984
<PP&E>                                           1,487
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,422
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,041
<BONDS>                                            738
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,643
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,422
<SALES>                                         13,743
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,743
<CGS>                                           10,324
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,183
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (36)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 135
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (541)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (45)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (496)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (496)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.20)
        

</TABLE>
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 Quarterly Report of LifeCare Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, G. Wayne
McAlister, 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; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Date: August 14, 2009



/s/ G. Wayne McAlisterG. Wayne McAlisterChief Executive Officer




37
EXHIBIT 10.2






EXHIBIT 10.2




DE-NE0000530
Amendment 004




 




AMENDMENT NO. 004
TO
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT DE-NE0000530 BETWEEN
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (“DOE”),
USEC INC. (“USEC”), 
AND 
AMERICAN CENTRIFUGE DEMONSTRATION, LLC (“ACD”) 
(collectively, the “Agreement”)


The purpose of the amendment is to revise the DOE Award Administrator/Contracting Officer and the DOE Program Manager identified in Article 4 - Agreement Administrators.


Accordingly,


		
	1.
	The DOE Award Administrator/Contracting Officer identified in Article 4.01 is revised as follows: 




DOE Award Administrator/Contracting Officer: 
Karen Shears, Contracting Officer
U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Office
200 Administration Road
FM-742
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
Telephone: 865-241-6411
Email: shearsks@oro.doe.gov


		
	2.
	The DOE Program Manager identified in Article 4.02 is revised as follows:




DOE Program Manager:  
David Henderson 
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Nuclear Energy
1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20585
Telephone:  (202) 586-5338  
Email:  david.henderson@hq.doe.gov


		
	3.
	All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain the same.












1 of 2















Acknowledgement of Authorized Recipient Representatives






/s/ Philip G. Sewell                3/26/13
Philip G. Sewell                Date
Senior Vice President 
USEC Inc.




/s/ Paul Sullivan                3/29/13
Paul Sullivan                    Date
Project Manager
American Centrifuge Demonstration, LLC




Signature of Department of Energy Contracting Officer






/s/ Matthew L. Parker                3/27/13
Matthew L. Parker                Date
Contracting Officer
U.S. Department of Energy




















































2 of 2
#### PICKING et al. v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO. et al.

Civil Action No. 1227.

District Court, M. D. Pennsylvania.

May 22, 1946.

*281See also 5 F.R.D. 76.

Ida M. Picking, of Baltimore, Md., for plaintiffs.

Nauman, Smith & Hurlock, of Harrisburg, Pa., for defendant Pennsylvania Railroad Co. ,-

J. McD. Sharpe and Edmund C. Wingerd, both of Chambersburg, Pa., for defendants J. Glenn Benedict, Watson R. Davidson, H. S. Beyers, and Paul H. Winger.

Wm. McK. Rutter, Deputy Atty. Gen. Pa., and James H. Duff, Atty. Gen. Pa., for defendants Arthur H. James, J. H. Pochyba, Samuel D. Mackey, G. J. Sweeney.

James A. Strite, of Chambersburg, Pa., for defendants Roy G. Kell, J. L. Kell, and Mrs. J. Kell.

Edwin D. Strite, of Chambersburg, Pa., for defendant W. R. Kieffer.

Wingerd & Long, of Chambersburg, Pa., for defendant C. B. Rotz.

WATSON, District Judge.

This action is now before the Court on a motion by the plaintiffs to dismiss a motion by the defendant, Pennsylvania Railroad Company, to dismiss the plaintiffs’ amended complaint as to the Pennsylvania Railroad Company. The plaintiffs advance several reasons, all, in the opinion of this court, without merit.

The most seriously stressed one was that “defendant did not serve its said Motion to Dismiss within 10 days after the service of the Amended Complaint upon it. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 12(a) (2), 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. Said amended complaint was * * * technically served upon it (the Defendant) on Saturday April 20, and its Motion to Dismiss was mailed to Plaintiffs on Wednesday, May 1, 1946, making a total of 11 days.”

Pertinent parts of the Rule referred to read as follows: “The service of any motion provided for in this rule alters the time fixed by these rules for serving any required responsive pleading as follows, unless a different time is fixed by order of the court: * * * (2) if the court grants a motion for a more definite statement or for a bill of particulars, the responsive pleading may be served within ten days after the service of the more definite statement or bill of particulars.” Rule 12(a) Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following 723c.

This motion is not a responsive pleading and, therefore, the provisions of the rule referred to do not apply. The motion is to dismiss the amended complaint because of failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Such a motion is always timely unless an answer has been duly made or the rules provide a time within which such a motion may be served and there is no such provision in the rules. Furthermore, the circumstances of this case do not warrant its disposal upon mere technicalities. In my opinion, the motion to dismiss by the defendant is timely and proper, and the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss it is without merit, and should be denied. Plaintiffs have insistently cried for a speedy determination of their rights, yet they continually file motions of this type in a volume never before encountered by this Court.

The motion by the plaintiffs to dismiss the motion of the defendant to dismiss the plaintiffs’ amended complaint must be, and hereby is, denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 24

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each of the undersigned, an officer and/or
a director of ASSOCIATES CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA (the "Company"), has
made, constituted and appointed and by these presents does hereby make,
constitute and appoint ROY A GUTHRIE, TIMOTHY M. HAYES, KEVIN P. HEGARTY, KEITH
W. HUGHES and CHESTER D. LONGENECKER, and each of them, his true and lawful
attorneys, for him and in his name, place and stead, and in his office and
capacity as aforesaid, to sign and file the Company's Annual Report on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1996, and any and all amendments
thereto and any and all other documents to be signed and filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission in connection therewith, hereby granting
to said ROY A GUTHRIE, TIMOTHY M. HAYES, KEVIN P. HEGARTY, KEITH W. HUGHES and
CHESTER D. LONGENECKER, and each of them full power and authority to do and
perform each and every act and thing whatsoever requisite and necessary to be
done in the premises, as fully, to all intents and purposes, as he might or
could do if personally present, hereby ratifying and confirming in all respects
that said ROY A GUTHRIE, TIMOTHY M. HAYES, KEVIN P. HEGARTY, KEITH W. HUGHES
and CHESTER D. LONGENECKER, or any of them, as said attorneys, may or shall
lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has subscribed his or her name,
this 25th day of February, 1997.




Signature: /s/ KEITH W. HUGHES CDL           Signature: /s/ H.D. MARSHALL
           ----------------------------                 -----------------------
Name:      Keith W. Hughes                   Name:      Harold D. Marshall
Title:     Chairman of the Board,            Title:     President and Director
           Principal Executive Officer 
           and Director


Signature: /s/ ROY A. GUTHRIE                Signature: /s/ JOSEPH M. MCQUILLAN
           ----------------------------                 -----------------------
Name:      Roy A. Guthrie                    Name:      Joseph M. McQuillan
Title:     Director, Executive               Title:     Vice Chairman of the 
           Vice President                               Board and Director
           and Chief Financial Officer

Signature: /s/ KEVIN P. HEGARTY
           ----------------------------
Name:      Kevin P. Hegarty
Title:     Senior Vice President, 
           Comptroller and Principal 
           Accounting Officer
# Gerstmann-Straussler-Scheinker Disease

## What is Gerstmann-Straussler-Scheinker disease? 

Gerstmann-Straussler-Scheinker disease (GSS) is an extremely rare, neurodegenerative brain disorder. It is almost always inherited and is found in only a few families around the world. The disease usually begins between the ages of 35 and 55. 

In the early stages, people with GSS may experience varying levels of ataxia (lack of muscle coordination), including clumsiness, unsteadiness, and difficulty walking. As the disease progresses, the ataxia becomes more pronounced, and most people develop dementia. 

Other symptoms may include
              - Dysarthria (slurring of speech)
              - Nystagmus (involuntary movements of the eyes)
              - Spasticity (rigid muscle tone)
              - Visual disturbances, sometimes leading to blindness

Deafness also can occur. In some families, parkinsonian features are present. GSS belongs to a family of human and animal diseases known as the transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs). Other TSEs include Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, kuru, and fatal familial insomnia.

There is no cure for GSS, nor are there any known treatments to slow progression of the disease. Current therapies are aimed at alleviating symptoms. GSS is a slowly progressive condition usually lasting from two to 10 years. The disease ultimately causes severe disability and finally death.

file-medical

## How can I or my loved one help improve care for people with Gerstmann-Straussler-Scheinker disease?

Consider participating in a clinical trial so clinicians and scientists can learn more about GSS and related disorders. Clinical research uses human volunteers to help researchers learn more about a disorder and perhaps find better ways to safely detect, treat, or prevent disease. 

All types of volunteers are needed—those who are healthy or may have an illness or disease—of all different ages, sexes, races, and ethnicities to ensure that study results apply to as many people as possible, and that treatments will be safe and effective for everyone who will use them. 

For information about participating in clinical research visit NIH Clinical Research Trials and You. Learn about clinical trials currently looking for people with GSS at Clinicaltrials.gov.
> Where can I find more information about Gerstmann-Straussler-Scheinker disease?
Information also may be available from the following resources:

MedlinePlus

National Institute on Aging (NIA)

National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD)Phone: 203-744-0100 or 800-999-6673; 844-259-7178 Spanish

book-open
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
Barnwell Industries, Inc.'s 1998 10-KSB and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such 10-KSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                            2178
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1679
<ALLOWANCES>                                        86
<INVENTORY>                                         76
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  4626
<PP&E>                                           56217
<DEPRECIATION>                                   32105
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   31661
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             5650
<BONDS>                                          14030
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           821
<OTHER-SE>                                        5923
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     31661
<SALES>                                          10910
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 11920
<CGS>                                             5045
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     5045
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  5893
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    76
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 722
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (3032)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       858
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (3890)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (3890)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.95)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.95)
        

</TABLE>
No. 5095.

(Court of Appeal, Parish of Orleans.)

#### B. R. FORMAN vs. IRENE FAYARD ET AL.

Cage, Baldwin & Crabites for plaintiff and. appellee.

J. McConnell, Jr., for defendant and appellant.

CrOD.CHAUX, J.

Shortly after the appeal bond was filed, appellee took a rule on appellants to show causé why the appeal should not be dismissed on the ground that the surety on the appeal bond did not possess the qualifications as to solvency that the law requires. This rule,. though filed before, was not heard in the lower court until after the transcript had been filed in this court; but upon the rule having been made absolute in the lower court, ordering the dismissal of the appeal, the appellee filed in this court a motion to dismiss, attaching to said motion the judgment of the lower Court, dismissing the appeal on the ground of the insufficiency of the surety.

The motion to dismiss must prevail. The lower Court was the proper tribunal to pass upon the sufficiency of the. surety, and its judgment upon that subject is not here for review either by appeal or upon writ. Ample author*491ity for the dismissal of this appeal is found in the following cases — to-wit:

June 15, 1910.

Baker vs. Schultz, 35 An. 524; Mt. Calvary Church vs. St. Paul, J., III La. 71; Weister vs. Blaise, 34 An. 833; Stewart vs. Cattle Co., 50 An. 845; Reynolds vs. Egan, 122 La. 47.

It is, accordingly, ordered that the appeal herein be dismissed at the cost of the appellant.

Appeal dismissed.