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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1997
<CASH>                                             779
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,451
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      2,247
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,637
<PP&E>                                           2,108
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,181
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,404
<BONDS>                                            178
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              285
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             6
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,791
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,181
<SALES>                                          7,243
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,243
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,010
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,023
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 186
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     24
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        24
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .005
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 196 (Thursday, October 12, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 47568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22032]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]


Notice of Maximum Amount of Assistance Under the Individuals and 
Households Program

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: FEMA gives notice of the maximum amount for assistance under 
the Individuals and Households Program for emergencies and major 
disasters declared on or after October 1, 2017.

DATES: This adjustment applies to emergencies and major disasters 
declared on or after October 1, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher B. Smith, Recovery 
Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 212-1000.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 408 of the Robert T. Stafford 
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (the Stafford Act), 42 
U.S.C. 5174, prescribes that FEMA must annually adjust the maximum 
amount for assistance provided under the Individuals and Households 
Program (IHP). FEMA gives notice that the maximum amount of IHP 
financial assistance provided to an individual or household under 
section 408 of the Stafford Act with respect to any single emergency or 
major disaster is $34,000. The increase in award amount as stated above 
is for any single emergency or major disaster declared on or after 
October 1, 2016. In addition, in accordance with 44 CFR 61.17(c), this 
adjustment includes the maximum amount of available coverage under any 
Group Flood Insurance Policy (GFIP) issued.
    FEMA bases the adjustment on an increase in the Consumer Price 
Index for All Urban Consumers of 1.9 percent for the 12-month period, 
which ended in August 2017. The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. 
Department of Labor released the information on September 14, 2017.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.048, Federal Disaster 
Assistance to Individuals and Households in Presidentially Declared 
Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster 
Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and 
Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to 
Individuals and Households--Other Needs.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-22032 Filed 10-11-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
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 China Botanic Pharmaceutical Inc (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended

October 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, /Issamar

Ginzberg, 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:



|(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 result of operations of

    the Company.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Dated:

    February 28, 2022 | By: | /s/

    Issamar Ginzberg                                                                                                           
|----------------------------- | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                              |     | Issamar

    Ginzberg

    Chief

    Executive Officer

    (Principal

    Executive Officer and

    Principal Financial Officer)
Rel: December 22, 2023

STATE OF ALABAMA -- JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

THE SUPREME COURT OCTOBER TERM, 2023-2024

SC-2023-0420 Leah Abbott Belser v. Marion County (Appeal from Marion Circuit Court: CV-22-900092). WISE, Justice. AFFIRMED. NO OPINION. See Rule 53(a)(1) and (a)(2)(E), Ala. R. App. P. Parker, C.J., and Shaw, Bryan, Mendheim, Stewart, Mitchell, and Cook, JJ., concur. Sellers, J., concurs in the result.
Exhibit
32





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER




I, Gary
Herman, certify that:





In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Digital Creative
Development Corporation for the quarter ending December 31, 2008 (the
"Report"), the undersigned officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his
knowledge:





(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; as amended; 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:
February 23,2009


/s/ Gary HermanGary
      HermanPresident





Exhibit 32







CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER




I,
Vincent De Lorenzo, certify that:





In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Digital Creative
Development Corporation for the quarter ending December 31, 2008 (the
"Report"), the undersigned officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his
knowledge:





(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; as amended; 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:
February 23, 2009


/s/ Vincent De LorenzoVincent
      De LorenzoChief
      Financial Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Labor Relations Board

# TIME AND DATE:

 Weeks of October 2 and 9, 2017

Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 10:00 a.m.

Wednesday, October 11. 2017, at 10:00 a.m. and at 2:00 p.m.

# PLACE:

 Board Agenda Room, No. 5065, 1015 Half St. SE., Washington DC.

# STATUS:

 Closed.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

 Pursuant to § 102.139(a) of the Board's Rules and Regulations, the Board or a panel thereof will consider “the issuance of a subpoena, the Board's participation in a civil action or proceeding or an arbitration, or the initiation, conduct, or disposition . . . of particular representation or unfair labor practice proceedings under section 8, 9, or 10 of the [National Labor Relations] Act, or any court proceedings collateral or ancillary thereto.” See also 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(10).

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

 Roxanne Rothschild, Deputy Executive Secretary, 1015 Half Street SE., Washington, DC 20570. Telephone: (202) 273-2917.

 Dated: October 3, 2017.

Roxanne Rothschild,

Deputy Executive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board.

[FR Doc. 2017-21592 Filed 10-3-17; 4:15 pm]

 BILLING CODE 7545-01-P
No. 99-10764 

-1-

 

* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 99-10764

Summary Calendar

 

RAY HONSBERGER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:98-CV-617-Y

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

February 25, 2000

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ray Honsberger appeals the magistrate judge’s judgment

affirming the decision of the Commissioner to deny Honsberger’s

disability claim. Our review is limited to determining whether

the record as a whole shows that the Commissioner’s decision is

supported by substantial evidence and whether the Commissioner

applied the proper legal standards. See Anthony v. Sullivan, 954

F.2d 289, 292 (5th Cir. 1992). 

The ALJ’s determination that Honsberger’s medical conditions

failed to meet the criteria set forth in the Impairment Ratings
No. 99-10764 

-2-

is supported by substantial evidence. As for Honsberger’s

ability to perform work despite his complaints of severe

headaches and neck pain, the ALJ has great discretion in

determining whether pain is disabling. See Wren v. Sullivan, 925

F.2d 123, 128 (5th Cir. 1991). The ALJ acted within his

discretion in rejecting these claims. See Griego v. Sullivan,

940 F.2d 942, 945 (5th Cir. 1991). 

We also find no error in the ALJ’s determination that

numerous jobs exist meeting Honsberger’s limitations. See Morris

v. Bowen, 864 F.2d 333, 335-36 (5th Cir. 1988). Thus, the ALJ

properly concluded that Honsberger is not disabled. 

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the

magistrate judge.

AFFIRMED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA PR24-0005

IN RE MOTION OF GENEVIEVE M. ZIMMERMAN FORADMISSION TO THE BAROF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

# FILED MAR -5 2024 Bovven Greenvvood Clerk of Supreme Court Slate of 4Aontana ORDER

Genevieve M. Zimmerman has moved for admission to the Bar of the State of Montana pursuant to Rule V ofthe Rules for Admission, Admission on Motion. The Bar Admissions Administrator ofthe State Bar of Montana has informed the Court that the Commission on Character and Fitness has certified that Zimmerman has provided the necessary documentation and has satisfied the requirements prerequisite to admission on motion under Rule V. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that upon payment of any application fees and completion of any other processing requirements as set forth by the Bar Admissions Administrator, Genevieve M. Zimmerman may be swom in to the practice of law in the State ofMontana. Arrangements for swearingin may be made by contactingthe office of the Clerk oftheMontana Supreme Court. The Clerk is directed to provide copies ofthis order to Petitioner and to the State Bar ofMontana• DATEDthis

—

day ofMarch, 2024. f/, 7 Ze/ \? ChiefJustice

1 03/05/2024

Case Number: PR 24-0005

# tal Justices

2
Exhibit 23.3(a)





            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We hereby consent to the  incorporation  by reference in this Form 10-KSB of our
report  dated  February 29,  2008,  which  appears on page 11 of the 2007 Annual
Report to Shareholders of Transbotics Corporation.


/s/Grant Thornton LLP

Charlotte, North Carolina
February 29, 2008





            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the  Registration  Statement on
Form S-2 (File No.  333-113465) of Transbotics  Corporation  filed with the U.S.
Securities  and Exchange  Commission  pursuant to the  Securities Act of 1933 on
March 10, 2004, of our report dated  February 29, 2008, which appears on page 11
of the 2007 Annual Report to Shareholders of Transbotics Corporation.


/s/Grant Thornton LLP


Charlotte, North Carolina
February 29, 2008
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

Order 

March 27, 2013

146383-4 & (55)(58)

____________________________________

In re APPLICATION OF INTERNATIONAL

TRANSMISSION COMPANY FOR

EXPEDITED SITING CERTIFICATE

____________________________________

ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESSES

ADVOCATING TARIFF EQUITY,

Appellant/Cross-Appellee,

v SC: 146383

COA: 303009

Public Service Commission:

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE 00-016200

COMMISSION,

Appellee,

and

INTERNATIONAL TRANSMISSION

COMPANY, d/b/a ITC TRANSMISSION,

Petitioner-Appellee/

Cross-Appellant,

and

CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY,

MICHIGAN PUBLIC POWER AGENCY,

and MICHIGAN MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC

ASSOCIATION,

Appellees.

____________________________________/

MICHIGAN PUBLIC POWER AGENCY

and MICHIGAN MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC

ASSOCIATION,

Appellees,

SC: 146384

v COA: 303040

Public Service Commission:

00-016200
I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

March 27, 2013

h0320

2

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE

COMMISSION,

Appellee,

and

INTERNATIONAL TRANSMISSION

COMPANY, d/b/a ITC TRANSMISSION,

Petitioner-Appellee/

Cross-Appellant,

and

CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY

Appellee,

and

ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESSES

ADVOCATING TARIFF EQUITY,

Appellant/Cross-Appellee.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the joint motion for immediate consideration is 

GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the November 6, 2012 judgment of the 

Court of Appeals and the application for leave to appeal as cross-appellant are considered 

and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE, in 

part, the judgment of the Court of Appeals. The Michigan Public Service Commission 

correctly determined that issuance of an expedited siting certificate under 2008 PA 295 

carries with it authorization to construct the transmission line that is the subject of the 

certificate. The Court of Appeals clearly erred in determining that Const 1963, art 4, § 25 

would be violated if 2008 PA 295 authorizes such construction because 2008 PA 295 was 

enacted without re-enacting and publishing 1995 PA 30, which generally governs 

construction of electric transmission lines. 2008 PA 295, and particularly Part 4 of the 

act, provides a comprehensive legislative scheme for issuing expedited siting certificates, 

and clearly intends construction of approved transmission lines. Because 2008 PA 295 is 

an act complete in itself, Const 1963, art 4, § 25 is not violated. See Alan v Wayne 

County, 388 Mich 210, 276-277 (1972), and People v Mahaney, 13 Mich 481, 496-497 

(1865). In all other respects, the applications are DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the remaining questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### In the Matter of Gurdial Pardesi, Appellant, v Anthony J. Schembri et al., Respondents.

[665 NYS2d 898]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Crane, J.), entered September 26, 1996, which granted petitioner’s motion to renew a prior order and judgment (one paper), entered July 12, 1995, granting respondent’s cross motion to dismiss this CPLR article 78 proceeding as barred by the doctrine of laches, and upon renewal, adhered to the prior order and judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Upon its evaluation of the merits of the renewal application, the court properly adhered to its prior determination that the claim for back pay was barred by laches *(see, Matter of Rapess v Ortiz,*99 AD2d 413; *Matter of Central School Dist. No. 2 v New York State Teachers’ Retirement Sys.,*27 AD2d 265, 267, *affd on other grounds*23 NY2d 213). Even accepting petitioner’s reason for not seeking relief earlier, more than one year passed before petitioner commenced this proceeding. We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Wallach, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-12-00719-CV

ENRIQUETA CASTILLO, ET AL.

v.

MIZPAH RESIDENTIAL CARE, D/B/A LA FAMILIA ADULT DAY CARE

On Appeal from the

445th District Court of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 2010-DCL-6521-I

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause 

remanded to the trial court. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court 

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

May 22, 2014
EXHIBIT 11
<TABLE>


                         BRISTOL RETAIL SOLUTIONS, INC.
                    Computation of Earnings (Loss) per Share
<CAPTION>
                                                                          Three Months Ended March 30,
                                                                            1998                  1997
                                                                      ----------------     ----------------
<S>                                                                   <C>                  <C> 
BASIC LOSS PER SHARE                                                                
      Net loss                                                        $      (453,179)     $      (434,986)
      Preferred stock dividends                                                 2,333                   --
                                                                      ----------------     ----------------
      Net loss available to common stockholders                       $      (455,512)     $      (434,986)
                                                                      ================     ================
      Weighted average number of common shares
         outstanding during the period                                      5,551,654            4,745,654
                                                                      ================     ================
Basic loss per share                                                  $         (0.08)     $         (0.09)
                                                                      ================     ================

DILUTED LOSS PER SHARE
      Net loss                                                        $      (453,179)     $      (434,986)
      Preferred stock dividends                                                 2,333                   --
                                                                      ----------------     ----------------
      Net loss available to common stockholders                       $      (455,512)     $      (434,986)
                                                                      ================     ================
      Weighted average number of common shares
         outstanding during the period                                      5,551,654            4,745,654
      Effect of stock options and warrants treated as
         common stock equivalents under the treasury stock method                  --                   --
                                                                      ----------------     ----------------
         Total shares                                                       5,551,654            4,745,654
                                                                      ================     ================
Diluted loss per share                                                $         (0.08)     $         (0.09)
                                                                      ================     ================
</TABLE>
#### Dwayne DELESTON, a/k/a Dwayne Curtis Deleston, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden FCI ESTILL, Respondent-Appellee, and United States of America, Respondent.

No. 10-7450.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 31, 2011.

Decided: April 5, 2011.

Dwayne Deleston, Appellant pro se.

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

*273Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Dwayne Deleston, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp.2010) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Deleston v. Warden,*No. 6:10-cv-02086-DCN, 2010 WL 3829220 (D.S.C. Sept. 27, 2010). 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.

*AFFIRMED.*