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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM U. S.
FRANCHISE SYSTEMS, INC. CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR THE QUARTER ENDED
MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          28,467
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      133
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,433
<PP&E>                                             365
<DEPRECIATION>                                      50
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  37,826
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,688
<BONDS>                                         18,708
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           426<F1>
<OTHER-SE>                                       9,738
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    37,826
<SALES>                                            545
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   545
<CGS>                                            2,963
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,963
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 480
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2,515)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2,515)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2,515)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.20)<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.20)<F2>
<FN>
<F1>INCLUDES 3,186,280 SHARES OF CLASS A COMMON STOCK THAT ARE REDEEMABLE UNDER
CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES BY THE COMPANY FOR REASONS NOT UNDER THE COMPANY'S
CONTROL.
<F2>PER SHARE AMOUNTS ARE DETERMINED BY DIVIDING LOSS APPLICABLE TO COMMON
STOCKHOLDERS BY WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING. WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES
INCLUDE REDEEMABLE COMMON SHARES OUTSTANDING. LOSS APPLICABLE TO COMMON
STOCKHOLDERS REPRESENTS NET LOSS ADJUSTED FOR DIVIDENDS ACCRETED ON THE
REDEEMABLE PREFERRED STOCK.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 14

- 00242

- CR

Tyrone Jenkins a.k.a. Tyrone Smith

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 158th District Court

o f Denton County (F

- 2012

- 0484

- B )

November 25, 2015

Opinion by Justice Dauphinot

(nfp)



### 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 tr ial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By

_ /s/ Lee Ann Dauphinot

______________ Justice Lee Ann Dauphinot
#### Reliable Store Fixture Company, appellee, v. Ella Willard, trading as Masonic Temple Lunch, appellant.

Gen. No. 27,654.

Action for a balance due upon a contract by plaintiff to supply defendant with a buffet. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Daniel P. Trude, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1922.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed October 30, 1922.

Shelley B. Neltnor, for appellant; Einar C. Howard, of counsel. M. M. Jacobs, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-20620

CHAD FENLEY DAVIS,

Petitioner-Appellant

v.

WILLIAM STEPHENS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL 

JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CV-2919

Before KING, JOLLY and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Chad Fenley Davis, Texas prisoner # 1336883, is serving a life sentence 

for capital murder. He has moved for a certificate of appealability (COA) from 

the denial of a motion he filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)

concerning his prior 28 U.S.C. § 2254 proceeding. A COA is unnecessary

because Davis merely asked the district court to reopen the time for filing an 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 29, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-20620 Document: 00513059626 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/29/2015
No. 14-20620

appeal from the denial of the § 2254 petition. See Dunn v. Cockrell, 302 F.3d

491, 492 & n.1 (5th Cir. 2002).

Davis’s case is therefore before us on his motion to appeal IFP, and our 

inquiry “is limited to whether the appeal involves ‘legal points arguable on 

their merits (and therefore not frivolous).’” Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 

(5th Cir. 1983) (citation omitted). We review the denial of Davis’s Rule 60 

motion for abuse of discretion. See Seven Elves, Inc. v. Eskenazi, 635 F.2d 396, 

402 (5th Cir. 1981). The denial “must have been so unwarranted as to 

constitute an abuse of discretion.” Id. A Rule 60 motion may not be used to 

circumvent the time limits for appealing, especially where, as here, the motion 

was made after the period for seeking an extension of time for appeal has 

expired. See Dunn, 302 F.3d at 492-93; see also Perez v. Stephens, 745 F.3d 

174, 177-79 (5th Cir.) (holding that Rule 60(b) does not permit circumvention 

of Rule 4’s time limits for appealing in a habeas case), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 

401 (2014). Martinez v. Ryan, 132 S. Ct. 1309 (2012), does not help Davis 

because Martinez did not create an exception “to statutory limits on appellate 

jurisdiction.” Perez, 745 F.3d at 179. The denial of Davis’s Rule 60 motion was 

not an abuse of discretion, and his appeal lacks arguable merit. See Howard, 

707 F.2d at 220; Seven Elves, 635 F.2d at 402.

A COA is DENIED AS UNNECESSARY; the IFP motion is DENIED, 

and the appeal is DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 14-20620 Document: 00513059626 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/29/2015
### §19321. Special hiring authority for scientific, engineering, and project management personnel

#### (a) In general

The Under Secretary for Science shall have the authority to—

(1) make appointments of not more than 60 scientific, engineering, and professional personnel, without regard to civil service laws, to assist the Department in meeting specific project or research needs;

(2) fix the basic pay of any employee appointed under this section at a rate to be determined by the Under Secretary at rates not in excess of Level II of the Executive Schedule (EX–II) under section 5311 of title 5 without regard to the civil service laws; and

(3) pay any employee appointed under this section payments in addition to basic pay, except that the total amount of additional payments paid to an employee under this subsection for any 12-month period shall not exceed the lesser of the following amounts:

(A) $25,000.

(B) The amount equal to 25 percent of the annual rate of basic pay of that employee.

(C) The amount of the limitation that is applicable for a calendar year under section 5307(a)(1) of title 5.

#### (b) Term

#### (1) In general

The term of any employee appointed under this section shall not exceed 3 years unless otherwise authorized in law.

#### (2) Termination

The Under Secretary for Science shall have the authority to terminate any employee appointed under this section at any time based on performance or changing project or research needs of the Department.

(Pub. L. 117–167, div. B, title VI, §10726, Aug. 9, 2022, 136 Stat. 1710.)
### §18611. Sense of Congress on accelerating energy innovation

It is the sense of Congress that—

(1) although important progress has been made in cost reduction and deployment of clean energy technologies, accelerating clean energy innovation will help meet critical competitiveness, energy security, and environmental goals;

(2) accelerating the pace of clean energy innovation in the United States calls for—

(A) supporting existing research and development programs at the Department and the world-class National Laboratories;

(B) exploring and developing new pathways for innovators, investors, and decision-makers to leverage the resources of the Department for addressing the challenges and comparative strengths of geographic regions; and

(C) recognizing the financial constraints of the Department, regularly reviewing clean energy programs to ensure that taxpayer investments are maximized;

(3) the energy supply, demand, policies, markets, and resource options of the United States vary by geographic region;

(4) a regional approach to innovation can bridge the gaps between local talent, institutions, and industries to identify opportunities and convert United States investment into domestic companies; and

(5) Congress, the Secretary, and energy industry participants should advance efforts that promote international, domestic, and regional cooperation on the research and development of energy innovations that—

(A) provide clean, affordable, and reliable energy for everyone;

(B) promote economic growth;

(C) are critical for energy security; and

(D) are sustainable without government support.

(Pub. L. 115–246, title I, §103, Sept. 28, 2018, 132 Stat. 3131.)
Case 3:08-cv-03432-SI Document 146 Filed 02/23/10 Page 1 of 8 Case3:07-cv-06300-SI Document121 Filed02/22/10 Page1 of 8
Case3:07-cv-06300-SI Document121 Filed02/22/10 Page2 of 8

Dated: Feb. 23, 2010

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

Judge Joseph C. Spero

Case 3:08-cv-03432-SI Document 146 Filed 02/23/10 Page 2 of 8
Case 3:08-cv-03432-SI Document 146 Filed 02/23/10 Page 3 of 8 Case3:07-cv-06300-SI Document121 Filed02/22/10 Page3 of 8
Case 3:08-cv-03432-SI Document 146 Filed 02/23/10 Page 4 of 8 Case3:07-cv-06300-SI Document121 Filed02/22/10 Page4 of 8
Case 3:08-cv-03432-SI Document 146 Filed 02/23/10 Page 5 of 8 Case3:07-cv-06300-SI Document121 Filed02/22/10 Page5 of 8
Case 3:08-cv-03432-SI Document 146 Filed 02/23/10 Page 6 of 8 Case3:07-cv-06300-SI Document121 Filed02/22/10 Page6 of 8
Case 3:08-cv-03432-SI Document 146 Filed 02/23/10 Page 7 of 8 Case3:07-cv-06300-SI Document121 Filed02/22/10 Page7 of 8
Case 3:08-cv-03432-SI Document 146 Filed 02/23/10 Page 8 of 8 Case3:07-cv-06300-SI Document121 Filed02/22/10 Page8 of 8
Editorial Note on Part 62
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 62 appear at 64 FR 54539, Oct. 7, 1999, and 67 FR 17612, 17613, Apr. 11, 2002.

§ 62.16 Employment. ( a ) An exchange visitor may receive compensation from the sponsor or the sponsor's appropriate designee, such as the host organization, when employment activities are part of the exchange visitor's program.
( b ) An exchange visitor who engages in unauthorized employment shall be deemed to be in violation of his or her program status and is subject to termination as a participant in an exchange visitor program.
( c ) The acceptance of employment by the accompanying spouse and dependents of an exchange visitor is governed by Department of Homeland Security regulations.
[79 FR 60307, Oct. 6, 2014]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       3,487
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                              194,701
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                174,807
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           435,710
<PP&E>                                   1,447,950
<DEPRECIATION>                             125,680
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           2,072,821
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      467,463
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                   159,300
<OTHER-SE>                                 750,478
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             2,072,821
<SALES>                                  1,076,391
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         1,083,392
<CGS>                                      290,978
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              928,020
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          78,344
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (135,606)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (135,606)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                     0
<EPS-BASIC>                                (.010)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                (.010)


</TABLE>
§ 1000.106 What families receiving assistance under title II of NAHASDA require HUD approval? ( a ) Housing assistance for non-low-income families requires HUD approval only as required in §§ 1000.108 and 1000.110.
( b ) Assistance for essential families under section 201(b)(3) of NAHASDA does not require HUD approval but only requires that the recipient determine that the presence of that family on the reservation or Indian area is essential to the well-being of Indian families and that the family's housing needs cannot be reasonably met without such assistance.
[77 FR 71525, Dec. 3, 2012]
### §4278. Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 86–380, §8, Sept. 24, 1959, 73 Stat. 706.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 2378 of Title 5 prior to the general revision and enactment of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, by Pub. L. 89–554, §1, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 378.
### §3105. Powers and duties of Secretary

(a) In the performance of, and with respect to, the functions, powers, and duties vested in him by this chapter, the Secretary shall (in addition to any authority otherwise vested in him) have the functions, powers, and duties set forth in section 1749a 1 of title 12, except subsections (a), (c)(2), and (f) thereof.

(b) The Secretary is authorized, notwithstanding the provisions of section 3324(a) and (b) of title 31, to make advance or progress payments on account of any grant made pursuant to this chapter. No part of any grant authorized to be made by the provisions of this chapter shall be used for the payment of ordinary governmental operating expenses.

(Pub. L. 89–117, title VII, §705, Aug. 10, 1965, 79 Stat. 492; Pub. L. 90–19, §22(b), May 25, 1967, 81 Stat. 26.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 1749a of title 12, referred to in subsec. (a), was repealed by Pub. L. 99–498, title VII, §702, Oct. 17, 1986, 100 Stat. 1545.

#### Codification

In subsec. (b), "section 3324(a) and (b) of title 31" substituted for "section 3648 of the Revised Statutes [31 U.S.C. 529]" on authority of Pub. L. 97–258, §4(b), Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1067, the first section of which enacted Title 31, Money and Finance.

#### Amendments

1967—Pub. L. 90–19 substituted "Secretary" for "Administrator" wherever appearing.

1 See References in Text note below.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Stipulation and Proposed Order to Continue Status Date

CR 09-0568

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO (CABN 44332)

United States Attorney

BRIAN J. STRETCH (CABN 163973)

Chief, Criminal Division

ACADIA L. SENESE (CABN 251287)

Special Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Ave., Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7200

Fax: (415) 436-7234

E-Mail: acadia.senese@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for the United States of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CHARLES A. VELEY,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. CR 09-0568 JCS

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS DATE

The above-referenced matter is currently scheduled before the Court on January 8, 2010,

at 10:30 a.m. for a status appearance. The Government needs additional time to respond to a

discovery request. The undersigned parties jointly stipulate and request that this date be

continued until January 29, 2010 at 10:30 a.m., the next available date for both Government and

Defense Counsel, before your Honor for a status appearance.

//

//

//

//

Case 3:09-cr-00568-JCS Document 11 Filed 01/08/10 Page 1 of 2 Case3:09-cr-00568-JCS Document10 Filed01/07/10 Page1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Stipulation and Proposed Order to Continue Status Date

CR 09-0568 -2-

SO STIPULATED.

Dated: 1/7/2010 /s/ 

ACADIA L. SENESE

Special Assistant United States Attorney

Dated: 1/7/2010 /s/ 

PAUL F. DEMEESTER

Attorney for Defendant

ORDER

For the aforementioned reasons, the hearing in the above captioned case is continued to January

29, 2010 at 10:30 a.m..

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ___________ __________________________________________

THE HONORABLE JOSEPH C. SPERO

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case3:09-cr-00568-JCS Document10 Filed01/07/10 Page2 of 2

1/8/2010

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

Judge Joseph C. Spero

Case 3:09-cr-00568-JCS Document 11 Filed 01/08/10 Page 2 of 2
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.                  

###### Export-Import Bank of the United States

                    This notice is to inform the public that the Export-Import Bank of the United States has received an application to finance the export of approximately $1.2 billion in U.S. semiconductor manufacturing equipment to dedicated foundries in China. The U.S. exports will enable the dedicated 200-mm and 300-mm foundries to produce approximately 80,000 wafers per month (200-mm equivalent) of logic products. Available information indicates that some of this new production will be exported from China and consumed globally. Interested parties may submit comments on this transaction by e-mail to                     *economic.impact@exim.gov*                     or by mail to 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Room 1238, Washington, DC 20571, within 14 days of the date this notice appears in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                 

Helene S. Walsh, 

Director, Policy Oversight and Review.

[FR Doc. 04-28101 Filed 12-22-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         405,459
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,735,961
<ALLOWANCES>                                   127,697
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,210,568
<PP&E>                                       5,298,219
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,815,762
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,781,080
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,323,698
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,624,261
<OTHER-SE>                                    (685,621)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,781,080
<SALES>                                     10,187,415
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,187,415
<CGS>                                        5,814,040
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,546,737
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              23,304
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                617,374
<INCOME-TAX>                                   233,700
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            383,674
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   383,674
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .07



</TABLE>
#### § 51.73 Privacy of hearing.

Only the person requesting the hearing, his or her attorney, an interpreter, the hearing officer, the reporter transcribing the hearing, and employees of the Department concerned with the presentation of the case may be present at the hearing. Witnesses may be present only while actually giving testimony or as otherwise directed by the hearing officer.

[83 FR 21876, May 11, 2018]
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-12-00093-CV

REAO JOSEPH KELLER APPELLANT

V.

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL 

TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE 

FOR HSI ASSET SECURITIZATION 

CORPORATION TRUST 2006-

WMCI

APPELLEE

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

FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF DENTON COUNTY

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

On June 21, 2012, we notified appellant that his brief had not been filed as 

required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.6(a). See Tex. R. App. P. 

38.6(a). We stated we could dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless 

appellant or any party desiring to continue this appeal filed with the court on or 

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

before July 2, 2012 a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. See

Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. We have not received any response.

Because appellant's brief has not been filed, we dismiss the appeal for 

want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b), 43.2(f).

Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: WALKER, MCCOY, and MEIER, JJ.

DELIVERED: July 19, 2012