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

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> BD
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from BHC
Financial's first quarter 1997 unaudited consolidated financial statements 
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such unaudited consolidated
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-28-1997
<CASH>                                           21880 
<RECEIVABLES>                                   521284 
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                               1159
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                           275552
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                              24285
<PP&E>                                            4431
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  871257
<SHORT-TERM>                                     55400    
<PAYABLES>                                      384605
<REPOS-SOLD>                                      1145
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                             284872
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                                2410
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             8
<OTHER-SE>                                       97785 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    871257
<TRADING-REVENUE>                                    0
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                              9063
<COMMISSIONS>                                     2612
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                        0
<FEE-REVENUE>                                    14945
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                4751
<COMPENSATION>                                    6275
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   7561
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                        7561
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      4515
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .68
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .68
        

</TABLE>
No. 117, Misc.

No. 119, Misc.

No. 120, Misc.

#### Nowak *v.*Nierstheimer, Warden; In re Brown; and Povich *v.*Nicholsen, Warden.

May 13, 1946.

The motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus are denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

SHAWN-RYAN WHITE & JAMES L. 

GIOVINETTI,

Petitioners

v.

VINCENT L. JOHNSON, IN HIS OFFICIAL 

CAPACITY AS PRESIDING OFFICIAL OF 

THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY AND THE FIRST 

JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

AND ERIC FEDER, IN HIS OFFICIAL 

CAPACITY AS PROTHONOTARY OF THE 

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY AND THE FIRST 

JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

AND ROCHELLE BILAL, IN HER OFFICIAL 

CAPACITY AS SHERIFF OF THE CITY 

AND COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, AND 

UNKNOWN DEPUTY SHERIFF OR 

SHERIFFS OF THE CITY AND COUNTY 

OF PHILADELPHIA, IN THEIR OFFICIAL 

CAPACITY OR CAPACITIES AS DEPUTIES 

OR OTHERWISE AS SUBORDINATES TO 

THE SHERIFF OF THE CITY AND COUNTY 

OF PHILADELPHIA,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 80 EM 2023

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 9th day of November, 2023, Petitioners’ Application for Leave to 

File Original Process is GRANTED. Petitioners’ requests for mandamus and injunctive 
[80 EM 2023 - 2]

relief are DENIED. Respondents’ Application for Relief to File a Response Nunc Pro Tunc 

is GRANTED. The temporary stay granted by Order dated October 27, 2023 is LIFTED.
**SEC. File Nos.	333-163115**

**811-22349**

** **

** **

 

**UNITED STATES**

**SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION**

	Washington, D.C. 20549
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 Wisconsin Gas LLC (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on March 11, 2005 (the Report), I, Gale E. Klappa, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby 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 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|/s/ GALE E. KLAPPA                                   
|Gale E. Klappa Chief Executive Officer March 11, 2005



This certification accompanies this
Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Wisconsin Gas LLC and
will be retained by Wisconsin Gas LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
O rder filed November 5 , 201 5



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

____________



### No. 11

- 1 5

- 00 228

- CR

__________



### FRANKIE RAY MCKINNEY , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 385 t h District Court

Midland County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CR4 4036

O R D E R

Court

- appointed counsel for Frankie Ray McKinney has filed in this court a

timely motion to abate this appeal to give the trial court an opportunity to conduct

a hearing on McKinney ’s motion to proceed pro se in this appeal

. We grant

counsel’s motion and abate this appeal.

W e abate the appeal and remand the cause to the trial court so that the trial

court may determine the following:

1. Whether McKinney desires to prosecute t h is appeal ;

2. W hether McKinney is indigent ;2

3. If not indigent, whether McKinney has retained counsel for this appeal ;

and

4. If indigent, whether McKinney desires to have counsel appoint ed to
represent h im in this appeal or whether, after being warned of the da ngers and disadvantages of self

- representation, McKinney competently and
intelligently chooses to exercise the right to represent h im self

.

If it is determined that McKinney is indigent and is exercising his right to represent

himself, the trial court must develop evidence as to whether McKinney ’s decision

to proceed without counsel is knowingly and intelligently made

. See Faretta v.

California , 422 U.S. 806 (1975); Ex parte Davis , 818 S.W.2d 64 (Tex. Cr im

. App.

1991); Hubbard v. State , 739 S.W.2d 341 , 345 (Tex. Cr im

. App. 1987); Webb v.

State , 533 S.W.2d 780 , 783

– 86 (Tex. Cr im

. App. 1976). The trial court is directed

to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law and to m ake any appropriate

recommendations to this court

.
The clerk of the trial court is directed to prepare and forward to this court a

supplemental clerk ’ s record containing the findings, recommendations, and any

orders of the trial court. The court report er is directed to prepare and forward to

this court the reporter ’ s record from the hearing. The se records are due to be filed

in this court on or before December 21 , 2015

.

The motion to abate is granted, and the appeal is abated.

PER CURIAM

November 5 , 2015

Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson , J. , and Bailey, J.
CAPITALGROUP PRIVATE CLIENT SERVICES FUNDS

AMENDEDAND RESTATED
CAUSE NO. 04-15-00074-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH COURT

OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

STACEY SCOTT,

Appellant

vs.

LARRY FURROW AND KELLER WILLIAMS LEGACY GROUP,

Appellees

ON APPEAL FROM THE 25TM JUDICIAL

DISTRICT COURT OF GUADALUPE COUNTY, TEXAS

CAUSE NO. 13-1125-CV-A

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF

TIME TO FILE BRIEF OF APPELLEES

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THE FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS OF

THE STATE OF TEXAS, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS:

NOW COME LARRY FURROW and KELLER WILLIAMS LEGACY

GROUP, Appellees in this cause, and file this their Unopposed Motion for Extension

of Time to File Brief; and in support thereof would respectfully show this Honorable

Court as follows: .

ACCEPTED

04-15-00074-CV

FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

11/2/2015 9:03:24 AM

KEITH HOTTLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 11/2/2015 9:03:24 AM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk
I.

Appellee's Brief is currently due on November 2, 2015. Appellant was

previously granted several unopposed extensions in which to file her brief. This is the

first request for an extension of the deadline for filing Appellees' Brief herein.

II.

In addition to the undersigned counsel's normally heavy trial and appellate

workload, counsel is involved in complex litigation pending in Cause No. 5-15-CV0284-RP in the Western District of Texas styled Nvision Biomedical Technologies,

LLC vs. JALEX Medical, LLC

III.

By reason of the foregoing, Appellees respectfully request of this Honorable

Court a 21-day extension until Monday, November 23, 2015 in which to file the Brief

ofAppellees in this matter. This extension of time will not work a hardship upon any

party, and will facilitate the presentation of briefs sufficient to apprise the Court of the

pertinent facts and law governing the issues at bar and to assist this Honorable Court

in a correct and complete resolution thereof.

IV.

Pursuant to Rule 10.1(a)(5), Tex. R. App. P., the undersigned counsel for

Appellees has conferred with Mr. Frederick Junldn, counsel for Appellant, who stated
that he is not opposed to this motion.

This extension is not sought for delay only, but so that justice may be done.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellees respectfully pray that

this Unopposed Motion for Extension to Time to File Brief be granted; and for such

other and further relief, at law or in equity, to which Appellees might show themselves

justly entitled.

Respectfully submitted,

THORNTON, BIECHLIN, SEGRATO,

REYNOLDS & GUERRA, L.C.

100 N.E. Loop 410, Suite 500

San Antonio, TX 78216

Telephone: 210/342-5555; 210/525-0666 fax

By: sA^auehan E. Waters

Vaughan E. Waters

State Bar No. 20916700

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

A true and correct copy of the above and foregoing instrument has been

forwarded to the undersigned party on the 2nd day of November, 2015.

Via e-service

Mr. Frederick Junldn

Andrews Kurth LLP

600 Travis St, Suite 4200

Houston'/TX 77002

Attorneys for Appellant.

sA^aughan E. Waters

Vaughan E. Waters
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. George HARRIS, Defendant— Appellant.

No. 07-7531.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 17, 2008.

Decided: Jan. 28, 2008.

George Harris, Appellant Pro Se.

Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

George Harris seeks to appeal the district court’s order treating his “Motion to Reopen and Supplement Original Filed Motion to Vacate Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255” as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, and dismissing it on that basis. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); *Reid v. Angelone,*369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir.2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Harris has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.

Additionally, to the extent that Harris has filed his motion pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b), we construe Harris’ notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. *United States v. Winestock,*340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner *498must assert claims based on either: (1) a new rule of constitutional law, previously unavailable, made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review; or (2) newly discovered evidence, not previously discoverable by due diligence, that would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense. 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b)(2), 2255 (2000). Harris’ claims do not satisfy either of these criteria. Therefore, we deny authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion.

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.*
EX-21
                         Subsidiaries of the Registrant



                                  EXHIBIT 21.1


                   Viking Capital Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
                     List of subsidiaries of the registrant

The following are current subsidiaries of Registrant.

                                                     Percent
Subsidiary and Name Under Which Business is Done      Owned      Where Organized
------------------------------------------------     -------     ---------------
Beijing Fei Yun Viking Enterprises Company, Ltd.       96%       China
NIAI Insurance Administrators, Inc.                   100%       California
Viking Administrators, Inc.                           100%       Texas
Viking Capital Financial Services, Inc.               100%       Texas
Viking Insurance Services, Inc.                       100%       Texas
Viking Systems, Inc.                                  100%       Texas
Wuxi Viking Garments Company, Ltd.                     25%       China
----

----

| (iv)   | Not      sooner than the date of execution of a Deal Sheet, but in no event later      than the first (1st) Business Day of the Injection Month applicable to the      Crude Oil identified in each such Deal Sheet, Purchaser will consult with      and advise Seller with respect to its execution of one or more Swaps with      the Swap Provider as contemplated in clauses (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) of      Section 2.01(f); provided, however, if Purchaser fails to consult with and      advise Seller with respect to any Swap, Seller may, on the first (1st)      Business Day of the Injection Month described above and throughout each      trading day of such Injection Month, proceed to execute such Ratable Swaps      as defined in Section 2.01(f)(i). |
|------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (v)   | Notwithstanding      the foregoing, if Purchaser shall advise Seller subsequent to the first      (1st) Business Day of the Injection Month, with respect to any Batch or      volumes that remain unhedged, then the Seller shall execute, in accordance      with Purchaser’s advice, Swaps with the Swap Provider as contemplated in      clause (ii) and clause (iii) of Section2.01(f). |
|-----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | Bank      Name: | BNP      Paribas New York |
|--------|-----------------|---------------------------|

|   | ABA      Account: | 0260-0768-9 |
|--------|-------------------|-------------|

|   | Instructions: | For      further credit to the account of Utexam Limited under Account No.      0200-605032-001 74 USD; |
|--------|---------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Clifton J. Nottingham, Appellant.

[853 NYS2d 518]

Present-Hurlbutt, J.P., Martoche, Lunn, Green and Gorski, JJ.
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 Quarterly Report of First Ipswich Bancorp (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Timothy L. Felter, Chief 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, 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.

      This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-B ("Item 601(b)(32)") promulgated under the
Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act") and the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the "Exchange Act"). In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32),
this certification (A) shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of
the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, and (B)
shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the
Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company
specifically incorporates it by reference.


/s/ Timothy L. Felter
-------------------------
Timothy L. Felter
Chief Financial Officer

November 14, 2006
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 23-50614

Summary Calendar

____________

John Bernard Williams, III, 

Plaintiff—Appellant,

versus

Hon. Jefferson Moore; Hon. Kristina Escalona; Hon. 

Ron Rangel; Hon. Melisa Skinner; Chief Justice 

Rebecca Martinez; B.C.D.A. Joe Gonzales; (Ret.) Hon. 

Charles J. Ramsay; Edward Frances Shaughnessy, III,

Atty; Ray Fuchs, Fiduciary; Richard Langlois, Dec’d Estate; 

Leo Caldera, CIV. B.C.A.; Unknown Defendants, Et al., 

Defendants—Appellees.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 5:23-CV-770

______________________________

Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 27, 2024

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-50614 Document: 53-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/27/2024
No. 23-50614

2

John Bernard Williams, III, Texas prisoner # 02425623, has filed a pro 

se appeal from the district court’s denial of his Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 60(b) motion challenging the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 

action and the denial of his motion to proceed in forma pauperisin the district 

court.

Williams does not meaningfully address the district court’s denial of 

his motion or its stated reasons for dismissing his complaint. Brinkmann v. 

Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). He has therefore abandoned any 

challenge to the district court’s dismissal of his complaint or denial of his 

Rule 60(b) motion. Id.

Because the appeal lacks arguable merit and is therefore frivolous, it is 

DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2; Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-

20 (5th Cir. 1983). His motions are DENIED. 

Case: 23-50614 Document: 53-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/27/2024
FRONTIER OIL CORPORATION
                  LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


Frontier Oil Corporation (incorporated in Wyoming)

    662712 Alberta Ltd. (incorporated in Alberta)

    Wainoco Resources, Inc. (incorporated in Delaware),
      a subsidiary of Frontier Oil Corporation.
    
    Wainoco Oil & Gas Company (incorporated in Delaware),
      a subsidiary of Wainoco Resources, Inc.

    Frontier Holdings Inc. (incorporated in Delaware),
      a subsidiary of Frontier Oil Corporation.

        Frontier Refining & Marketing Inc. (incorporated in Delaware),
          a subsidiary of Frontier Holdings Inc.
        
          Frontier Refining Inc. (incorporated in Delaware),
            a subsidiary of Frontier Refining & Marketing Inc.
        
          Frontier Oil and Refining Company (incorporated in Delaware),
            a subsidiary of Frontier Refining & Marketing Inc.
        
          Frontier Pipeline Inc. (incorporated in Delaware),
            a subsidiary of Frontier Refining & Marketing Inc.
Exhibit 23.2




            Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


We have issued our report  dated March 28, 2003  accompanying  the  consolidated
financial statements of Cabeltel International  Corporation (formerly Greenbriar
Corporation)  and  subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2002 included in
the Annual  Report of Cabeltel  International  Corporation  on Form 10-K for the
year  ended  December  31,  2004.  We hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by
reference  of  said  report  in  the   Registration   Statements  of  Greenbriar
Corporation on Form S-8 (File No. 33-50868 and 33-33985).




GRANT THORNTON LLP

Dallas, Texas
November 21, 2005
**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the use in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 44 toRegistration Statement No. 033-32785 on Form N-1A of our report dated November 10, 2014, relating to the financial statements andfinancial highlights of SMALLCAP World Fund, Inc. appearing in the Statement of Additional Information, which is part of such RegistrationStatement, and to the references to us under the headings “Financial highlights” in the Prospectus and “Independentregistered public accounting firm” and “Prospectuses, reports to shareholders and proxy statements” in the Statementof Additional Information, which are part of such Registration Statement.

 

 

 

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

 

Costa Mesa, California

November 28, 2014