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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       3,829,600
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  312,300
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (27,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,141,900
<PP&E>                                       1,210,450
<DEPRECIATION>                               (374,950)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,321,200
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          671,200
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,693,800
<OTHER-SE>                                 (8,258,200)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,321,200
<SALES>                                      1,137,600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,137,600
<CGS>                                          244,400
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,544,600
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                95,200
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,831,400
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,387,600)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    91,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,295,800)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,295,800)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.36)


</TABLE>
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

1331 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW

SUITE 520N

WASHINGTON, DC 20004

October 20, 2014

TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m., Wednesday, October 29, 2014

PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004 (entry from 

F Street entrance)

STATUS: Open 

MATTERS TO BE 

CONSIDERED: The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open 

session: Secretary of Labor v. Black Beauty Coal Co., Docket Nos. 

LAKE 2008-378-R, et al. (Issues include whether the 

Administrative Law Judge erred in concluding that the resumption 

of mining in an area following a roof fall in that area constituted a 

violation and whether an on-shift examination of another area was 

required.)

Any person attending this meeting who requires special 

accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 

interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those 

needs. Subject to 29 C.F.R. § 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON 

FOR MORE INFO: Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD 

Relay / 1-800-877-8339 for toll free.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3561 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3561

To assist survivors of stroke and other debilitating health occurrences 
                         in returning to work.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 28, 2021

 Mrs. Beatty introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To assist survivors of stroke and other debilitating health occurrences 
                         in returning to work.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Return to Work Awareness Act''.

SEC. 2. ASSISTING SURVIVORS OF STROKE AND OTHER DEBILITATING HEALTH 
              OCCURRENCES IN RETURNING TO WORK.

    The Secretary of Labor, acting through the Job Accommodation 
Network, may disseminate information and promote awareness among 
survivors of stroke and other debilitating health occurrences, such as 
traumatic brain injury and heart attack, and the families of such 
survivors, as well as among private employers, government agencies, 
employee representatives, and service providers to--
            (1) assist survivors of stroke and such other debilitating 
        health occurrences in returning to work;
            (2) improve survivor's employability and demonstrate to 
        employers the most effective ways to capitalize on the value 
        and talent that these survivors add to the workplace; and
            (3) enhance self-employment and entrepreneurship options 
        for survivors.
                                 <all>
```
Order entered December 23, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-01237-CV

MICHAEL BLOOM, Appellant

V.

SANDRA M. SWANGO, Appellee

On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 3

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. PR-14-01380-3

ORDER

Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart

We DENY appellant’s November 10, 2014 motion for stay and/or writ of prohibition and 

November 17, 2014 first supplement to motion.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
Skip to main content    

      Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission    

En Español

            - About FMSHRC               - News
              - Commissioners
              - Chairman and Commissioner Tenure
              - Administrative Law Judges
            - Guides               - Frequently Asked Questions
              - FOIA Guide
              - How a Case Proceeds Before the Commission
              - Guide to Commission Proceedings
              - Requests to Reopen
              - Instructions for Electronic Filing
              - Videoconference Hearings
              - Section 105(c)(3) Complaints
            - Decisions               - Review Commission Decisions
              - ALJ Decisions
              - Blue Books
            - Review Commission Arguments & Meetings               - Oral Arguments
              - Meetings
            - The Mine Act & Procedural Rules               - The Mine Act
              - Procedural Rules
              - Changes to Procedural Rules
            - FOIA               - Submit a FOIA Request
              - FOIA Guide
              - Rules
              - FOIA References
              - FOIA Library
              - FOIA Public Liaison
              - FOIA Reports
              - Proposed FOIA Rules
            - Reports & Budget Submissions               - Strategic Plans
              - Budget and Annual Performance Reports
              - Buy American Reports
              - Performance Accountability Reports
              - Sustainability Report
              - Reports to Congress
              - Contingency Plan
              - Reports to the President
            - Cases on Review               - Cases Currently on Review Before the Commission
              - Commission Decisions On Appeal
            - Contact Us

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-                   Secretary of Labor v. IO Coal Company, Inc., Docket No. WEVA 2007-293.               

#   Secretary of Labor v. IO Coal Company, Inc., Docket No. WEVA 2007-293. 

meeting_061009.pdf

meeting061009.mp3

##### Footer Links

-  EEO Policies 
-  No Fear Act Notice 
-  Employee Ethical Conduct 
-  Equal Access to Justice Act 
-  Motions to Approve Settlement 
-  Non-Discrimination 
-  Reasonable Accommodation Procedures 
-  Privacy Act 
-  Sunshine Act Regulations 
-  USA.gov 
-  FMSHRC Privacy Policy 
-  Vulnerability Disclosure Policy 

### The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

#### 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Suite 520NWashington, DC 20004-1710Phone: 771-210-1887 TTY/TDD (202)434-4000 ext. 293E-mail: fmshrc@fmshrc.gov
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6700
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RICKY PAGE REYNOLDS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (7:00-cr-00006-SGW; 7:06-cv-00082-SGW) Submitted: December 14, 2006 Decided: December 19, 2006 Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ricky Page Reynolds, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Jack Bondurant, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Ricky Page Reynolds seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion and his motion for reconsideration. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Reynolds has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1631 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 429

103d CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 1631

                          [Report No. 103-261]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To amend title 11, District of Columbia Code, to increase the maximum 
amount in controversy permitted for cases under the jurisdiction of the 
   Small Claims and Conciliation Branch of the Superior Court of the 
                         District of Columbia.

_______________________________________________________________________

                 May 18 (legislative day, May 16), 1994

                       Reported with an amendment

                                                       Calendar No. 429
103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 1631

                          [Report No. 103-261]

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                July 20 (legislative day, June 30), 1993

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

                 May 18 (legislative day, May 16), 1994

                Reported by Mr. Glenn, with an amendment
  [Omit the part struck through and insert the part printed in italic]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend title 11, District of Columbia Code, to increase the maximum 
amount in controversy permitted for cases under the jurisdiction of the 
   Small Claims and Conciliation Branch of the Superior Court of the 
                         District of Columbia.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``District of Columbia Justice Reform 
Act of -1-9-9-3 1994''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE IN MAXIMUM AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY PERMITTED FOR CASES 
              UNDER JURISDICTION OF SMALL CLAIMS AND CONCILIATION 
              BRANCH OF SUPERIOR COURT.

    (a) In General.--Section 11-1321, District of Columbia Code, is 
amended by striking ``$2,000'' and inserting ``$5,000''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to cases filed with the Superior Court of the District of 
Columbia on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 19, 1993.

            Attest:

                                           DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-20-00415-CV

LAKXN INCOME, INC., Appellant

V.

TLC HOSPITALITY, LLC, Appellee

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 96th District 

Court

of Tarrant County (096-315146-20)

July 22, 2021

Memorandum Opinion by Justice 

Birdwell

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that LAKXN Income, Inc. shall pay all of the costs of this 

appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Wade Birdwell

 Justice Wade Birdwell
Exhibit 21

GEORGIA GULF CORPORATION  SubsidiariesAs of March 14, 2009

Company Name

Jurisdiction of
Incorporation1.

Georgia Gulf Corporation

Delaware2.

1299239 Ontario Limited [HoldCo.]

Ontario3.

6630987 Canada Inc. [Vaughan East]

Canada4.

6632149 Canada Inc.

Canada5.

Advanced Profiles, S.A. de C.V.

Mexico6.

Bluegrass Products, LLC

Delaware7.

Dartmouth Extrusions Limited

Ontario8.

Edificacion Tecnica Internacional S.A. de C.V.

Mexico9.

Georgia Gulf Chemicals & Vinyls, LLC

Delaware10.

Georgia Gulf Europe, ApS

Copenhagen, Denmark11.

Georgia Gulf Lake Charles, LLC

Delaware12.

GGRC Corporation

Delaware13.

Great River Oil & Gas Corporation (Acquired by Georgia Gulf Corporation on July 25, 1980)

Delaware14.

Royal Window and Door Profiles Plant # 12, Inc. ((f.k.a) Royal Sierra Extrusions, Inc)

Nevada15.

Royal Window and Door Profiles Plant # 13 ((f.k.a.) Custom Window Extrusions))

Pennsylvania16.

Royal Window and Door Profiles Plant # 14 ((f.k.a.) King Extrusions)

Washington17.

Kolorbond International Limited

United Kingdom18.

Le-Ron Plastics Inc.

British Columbia19.

Novo Capital, Inc.

Nevada20.

Novo Management Inc.

Nevada21.

PHH Monomers, LLCMembers

Louisiana22.

Plastic Trends, Inc.

Michigan23.

RBS (U.S.A.) Limited

Delaware24.

Rome Acquisition Holding Corp.

Nova Scotia ULC25.

Rome Delaware Corporation

Delaware26.

Royal Buildings Products, a division of Royal Mouldings Limited (Newbern Tennessee Division)

Nevada27.

Royal Group Mexico S.A.de C.V.

Mexico28.

Royal Group Sales (USA) Limited

Nevada29.

Royal Group, Inc.

Canada30.

Royal Mouldings Limited

Nevada31.

Royal Outdoor Products, Inc.

Indiana32.

Royal Plastics Group (U.S.A.) Limited

Delaware33.

Royal Railings, LLC

Pennsylvania34.

Royal Building Systems De Mexico, S.A. de C.V.

Mexico35.

Royal Ventures Construction & Development, Inc.(in the process of being sold)

Philippines36.

Royal Ventures Land Holdings Corp.(in the process of being sold)

Philippines37.

Royal Vinylbilt Limited

Ontario38.

Royal Window Coverings (USA) L.P.

Texas39.

Royalguard, Inc. (Shell Co.)

Delaware40.

Roybridge Financing Trust

Quebec41.

RoyCom Limited

Manitoba42.

Vinyl Solutions, LLC

Delaware


---



QuickLinks
United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

August 4, 2011 

ERRATA 

______________________ 

Appeal No. 2010-1445 

CREATIVE COMPOUNDS, LLC, 

v. 

STARMARK LABORATORIES, 

Decided: June 24, 2011 

Precedential Opinion 

______________________ 

Please make the following change: 

Page 5, line 17, change “2009” to --2006--.
117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3539 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 223 West Chalan Santo Papa in Hagatna, 

Guam, as the ‘‘Atanasio Taitano Perez Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 3539 EH

1 SECTION 1. ATANASIO TAITANO PEREZ POST OFFICE. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 223 West Chalan Santo Papa 

4 in Hagatna, Guam, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘Atanasio Taitano Perez Post Office’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Atanasio Taitano 

10 Perez Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives February 9, 

2022. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3539 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostTaitano Perez Post Office’’. Papa in Hagatna, Guam, as the ‘‘Atanasio al Service located at 223 West Chalan Santo
## 1999 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

7-19-1999 

# U S A v . O ne T o shi b a C olor T V

P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al :

D ock e t 98-3578,98-3579

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du/thir dc ir c uit_1999

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. I t h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 1999 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du

. 

## R e c omme nde d C it a t ion

" U SA v . One T oshi b a C o lor T V " (1999). 1999 D e cisio n s

. P ape r 207. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w
. v i l l a no v a
. e du/thir dc ir c uit_1999/207

### Filed July 19, 1999

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

NOS. 98-3578 and 98-3579

No. 98-3578

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

ONE TOSHIBA COLOR TELEVISION; TWO ANSWERING MACHINES; ONE HEALTH TECH COMPUTER *Reginald McGlory, Appellant *(Pursuant to Rule 12(a), F.R.A.P.) (D.C. Civ. No. 90-cv-00138)

No. 98-3579

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

ASSORTED JEWELRY *Reginald McGlory, Appellant *(Pursuant to Rule 12(a), F.R.A.P.) (D.C. Civ. No. 90-00370)
Before: BECKER, Chief Judge, SLOVITER, MANSMANN GREENBERG, SCIRICA, NYGAARD, ALITO, ROTH, McKEE, and RENDELL, Circuit Judges.

O R D E R
A majority of the active judges having voted for re hearing en banc in the above appeals, it is

### ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court list the above cases

for rehearing en banc at the convenience of the Cou rt.

BY THE COURT:

/S/ Edward R. Becker

CHIEF JUDGE
DATED: July 19, 1999

A True Copy: Teste:
Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

2
**EXHIBIT 32(a)**

 

**Assisted HousingFund  L.P. I**

 

**Certification of thePresident of the General Partner**

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,Robert K. Stump, the President of Murphey Favre Properties, Inc.,  General Partner of  Assisted Housing Fund L.P. I, does hereby certify that this report on Form 10-Q fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 andthat the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and the results of operations of the InvestorPartnership.

 

 
| By:    | Murphey Favre Properties,  Inc. |   |   |
|--------|---------------------------------|--------|--------|
|   | *General  Partner*              |   |   |
|   |                            |   |
|   |                            |   |
| By:    | /s/ Robert K.  Stump       |   |   | Date:  | August 8, 2003 |   |
|   | Robert K.  Stump           |   |   |
|   | *President*                     |   |   |
|        |                                 |        |        |  |  |  |

 

1

----
RAYMOND HAYNES,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-1772

_____________________________/

Opinion filed April 17, 2017.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.

James O. Shelfer, Judge.

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, Kathleen Stover, Assistant Public Defender, 

Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, C.J., LEWIS, and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR.
[ARTICLE] 5
[MULTIPLIER] 1
<TABLE>
<S>                             <C>
[PERIOD-TYPE]                   3-MOS
[FISCAL-YEAR-END]                          APR-30-1998
[PERIOD-END]                               JUL-31-1998
[CASH]                                              91
[SECURITIES]                                       849
[RECEIVABLES]                                        0
[ALLOWANCES]                                         0
[INVENTORY]                                          0
[CURRENT-ASSETS]                                   940
[PP&E]                                               0
[DEPRECIATION]                                       0
[TOTAL-ASSETS]                                     940
[CURRENT-LIABILITIES]                             1763
[BONDS]                                              0
[PREFERRED-MANDATORY]                                0
[PREFERRED]                                          0
[COMMON]                                           207
[OTHER-SE]                                      (1030)
[TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY]                       940
[SALES]                                              0
[TOTAL-REVENUES]                                     0
[CGS]                                                0
[TOTAL-COSTS]                                        0
[OTHER-EXPENSES]                                     0
[LOSS-PROVISION]                                     0
[INTEREST-EXPENSE]                                   0
[INCOME-PRETAX]                                      0
[INCOME-TAX]                                         0
[INCOME-CONTINUING]                                  0
[DISCONTINUED]                                       0
[EXTRAORDINARY]                                      0
[CHANGES]                                            0
[NET-INCOME]                                         0
[EPS-PRIMARY]                                        0
[EPS-DILUTED]                                        0
</TABLE>
#### The State of Ohio, Appellee, *v.*Roberson, Appellant.

[Cite as *State v. Roberson,*118 Ohio St.3d 193, 2008-Ohio-2215.]

(No. 2007-0567

Submitted May 6, 2008

Decided May 14, 2008.)

Timothy Young, State Public Defender, and Kenneth R. Spiert, Assistant State Public Defender, for appellant.

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority of *State v. Simpkins,*117 Ohio St.3d 420, 2008-Ohio-1197, 884 N.E.2d 568.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, and Cupp, JJ., concur.

Lanzinger, J., dissents.