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

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ANNUAL
REPORT ON FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1998.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>     1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,990
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   26,047
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (930)
<INVENTORY>                                     60,941
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                95,077
<PP&E>                                         261,779
<DEPRECIATION>                                (61,097)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 300,901
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           49,175
<BONDS>                                        188,749
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            36
<OTHER-SE>                                      13,756
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   300,901
<SALES>                                        407,006
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               407,006
<CGS>                                          346,408
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  366,262
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                18,248
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   334
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,493
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,106)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,526
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,632)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,044)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,676)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.57)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.57)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000945633
<NAME> UNITED STATIONERS SUPPLY CO.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          10,619
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  297,719
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,318
<INVENTORY>                                    463,239
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               790,480
<PP&E>                                         225,041
<DEPRECIATION>                                  51,266
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,109,867
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          385,507
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           19,785
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,153
<OTHER-SE>                                      74,667
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,109,867
<SALES>                                      2,298,170
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,298,170
<CGS>                                        1,907,209
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,907,209
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               277,957
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 7,791
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              57,456
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 55,548
<INCOME-TAX>                                    23,555
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             31,993
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    31,993
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.03
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-6075

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

COBEY DARON WEBB,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at 

Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, Chief District Judge. (7:05-cr-00102-GEC-RSB-1; 7:16-cv81213-GEC-RSB)

Submitted: May 16, 2017 Decided: May 17, 2017

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cobey Daron Webb, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, Assistant United States 

Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Cobey Daron Webb seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 

U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion without prejudice as successive. The order is not 

appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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) (2012). When 

the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the 

constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court 

denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the 

dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of 

the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Webb 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 this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### § 1230.36 Hearings; when not provided for.

No hearing is provided for when the health, medical, or drug officer or agent of any State, Territory, or possession, or of the District of Columbia, acts under the authority contained in section 8 of the Federal Caustic Poison Act (44 Stat. 1409; 15 U.S.C. 408) in reporting a violation direct to the United States attorney.
## U nit edSta tes C ou rt o f A pp eal s For t h e Firs t C ircu it

No. 08-1385 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. ALTON SHERMAN, Appellant. ERRATA The opinion of this Court issued on December 22, 2008, is amended as follows: On page 12, line 4, change "differs" to "differ".
#### Michael J. Ford, Respondent, *v.*Adams Dry Goods Company, Appellant.

*Ford*v. *Adams Dry Goods Co.,*131 App, Div. 895, affirmed.

(Argued October 7, 1908;

decided October 23, 1908.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered August 3, 1907, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been received through defendant’s negligence.

*Frederick E. Fishel*for appellant.

*Maurice L.*Reidenheimer, *Emanuel vam, Dernoot*and *Louis J. Vorhaus*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Edward T. Bartlett, Vann, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ. Dissenting: Cullen, Oh. J., Haight and Werner, JJ.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of National Medical Health Card Systems, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q
for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James F. Smith, President and 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, to my knowledge:

(1) the Report fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 result of operations of the Company.



|                                                                   
|-------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ James F. Smith                                                 
|James F. Smith                                                     
|President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
|Date: February 23, 2007                                            

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be
incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
No. 56

The People &c.,

Respondent,

v.

Sergio Cerda,

Appellant.

Donna Aldea, for appellant.

Andrew Fakuda, for respondent.

Reargument ordered for a future Court session. Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera,

Garcia, Wilson, Cannataro and Troutman concur. Judge Singas took no part.

Decided May 24, 2022
**EXHIBIT 32.1**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**
     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,I, Gordon Ellis, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify that:
1. To my knowledge, this report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
2. To my knowledge, the information in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of International Absorbents Inc. as of April 30,2005.   Date: June 10, 2005 /s/ GORDON ELLIS
#### Turner, Receiver, *v.*Illinois Steel Company.

[No. 18,824.

Filed May 18, 1900.]

*Evidence.*— Weight.—Where in an action on a note the defendant pleaded a set-off on account of rents claimed to be due under a lease, and the lease failed to show on its face any obligation against plaintiff, the action of the court in excluding the lease will not be disturbed on appeal, there being some evidence to support the finding that plaintiff was not the lessee.

Erom the Lake Circuit Court.

*Affirmed.*

*A. F. Knotts,*for appellant.

*W. D. Haynie*and *J. Kopellce,*for appellee.

Bakeb, J.

In August, 1893, the East Chicago Iron and Steel Company executed notes, secured by mortgage of its plant at East Chicago, Indiana, which by indorsement became the property of appellee. In July, 1896, Turner was appointed receiver of the East Chicago Company. Appellee filed an intervening petition to enforce its claim upon the notes and mortgage. The receiver pleaded a set-*599off on account of rents claimed to be dne him from appellee under a lease of the East Chicago plant alleged to have been executed by the receiver as lessor to appellee as lessee. The court found for appellee on its claim, and against the receiver on his set-off.

The only question presented is the admissibility of a written lease offered in evidence by the receiver. In this lease, the receiver was lessor, and one “William H. McLean, as trustee,” was lessee. The lease on its face is no evidence of an obligation against appellee. The receiver introduced parol evidence for the purpose of identifying appellee as the undisclosed principal; and, among other witnesses, examined McLean. The evidence is conflicting, but there is evidence, which manifestly was acted upon by the court, to justify the finding that appellee was not the lessee. Since that was the ultimate issue of fact to be determined by the court, as the trier, there is no available error in the action of the court ■in excluding the lease.

Judgment affirmed.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                           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 Annual Report of Level 8 Systems, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, John P. Broderick, Chief Operating and Financial Officer, 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 operation of the
Company.



/s/ John P. Broderick
-------------------------------------------
John P. Broderick
Chief Operating and Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
March 31, 2002

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Level 8 Systems, Inc. and will be retained by Level 8 Systems, Inc.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent, v. F. M. TULLAR, Appellant.

Kansas City Court of Appeals,

November 1, 1909.

APPEALS: Crimes: Record. Where a complete record of a criminal case, including the evidence, instructions, verdict, judgment, motions for new trial and in arrest of judgment, the Courts ruling thereon and the order granting an appeal, is presented to the court, it is sufficient notwithstanding there is no abstract of the case or brief or argument filed by appellant.

Appeal from Caldwell Circuit *Court.*— Eon. *F. E. Trimble}*Judge.

Affirmed.

*J. G. Wilson*for appellant.

*D. E. Aclams*for respondent.

BROADDUS, P.. J.

— At the November Term, 1907, of the circuit court of Caldwell county, the defendant was indicted by the grand jury of the county for the *388illegal sale of whisky. The indictment was in three counts. In the first count he was charged with the illegal sale of whisky as a dramshop keeper. In the second and third counts he was charged with the illegal sale of whisky as a licensed druggist. The prosecuting attorney dismissed as to the first count of the indictment and the cause was tried before a jury on the charges contained in the second and third counts, and defendant was convicted on both counts. The defendant in due time filed motion for a new trial and in arrest of judgment, which were overruled by the court, and judgment entered on the verdict of the jury. The defendant appealed. He has filed no abstract of the case and no brief and argument in this court. The State has moved to dismiss the appeal for such failure, but the motion is overruled.

Section 2716, Revised Statutes 1899, governing appeals in criminal cases, expressly provides that: “No assignment of error or joinder in error shall be necessary upon any appeal or writ of error, in a criminal case issued or taken,” etc.; “but the court shall proceed upon the return thereof without delay, and render judgment upon the record before them.”

The defendant has presented to the court a complete record of the case, including the trial, with the evidence, instructions, verdict, judgment, and his motion for a new trial and in arrest of judgment, and the ruling of the court upon them and the order granting an appeal.

In the pursuance of the mandate of the statute we have examined the record, and find that the indictment is sufficient; that the evidence justified the defendant’s conviction of the crime with which he was charged; that there was no error in the admission or rejection of evidence ; and that defendant had a fair and impartial trial. Wherefore the cause is affirmed.

All concur.
§ 1317.10 Registrant return or recall. ( a ) Each registrant shall maintain a record of each return or recall transaction in accordance with the information required of manufacturers in § 1304.22(a)(2)(iv) of this chapter.
( b ) Each registrant that delivers a controlled substance in Schedule I or II for the purpose of return or recall shall use an order form in the manner described in part 1305 of this chapter.
( c ) Deliveries for the purpose of return or recall may be made through a freight forwarding facility operated by the person to whom the controlled substance is being returned provided that advance notice of the return is provided and delivery is directly to an agent or employee of the person to whom the controlled substance is being returned.
### MEMORANDUM

TO: Record

FROM: James K. O’Connell, ERG

Sarah Yates, ERG

DATE: February 18 , 2016

SUBJECT: Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (WY OGCC) Water Data

Memorandum ( DCN SGE0 1244 )

In September 2015, EPA reached out to the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (WY OGCC) to request the full , underlying data set behind the “ Water Analysis ”

data that is available by searching on their website at ( http://w ogcc.state.wy.us/warchoiceMenu.cfm ). WY OGCC provided the requested data, and it was used to support the Unconventional Oil and Gas (UOG) Produced Water Volumes and Characterization Data Compilation memorandum ( DCN SGE01184 ) that was developed in
support o f the Te chnical Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for Oil and Gas Extraction

. The full, underlying data set is included as Attachment 1 to this memorandum (DCN SGE01244.A01).

EPA and ERG communicated with WY OGCC to obt ain the units of measure for the various parameters included in the data set

. WY OGCC was not able to identify the units for all of the reported parameters. As noted in Table 1

, ERG excluded parameters for which units could

not be identified from the produced water characterization analysis described in the UOG Produced Water Volumes and Characterization Data Compilation memorandum ( DCN

SGE01184 )

. Table 1 shows the list of parameters in the WY OGCC full, underlying data set in Attachment 1 (DCN SGE01244.A01) and notes whether or not each parameter from the WY

OG CC data was included in ERG’s analysis.

Table 1 . List of Parameters

Parameter Name Included in Analysis? (Yes/No)

Arsenic No

Barium No

Bicarbonate Yes

Cadmium No

Calcium Yes

Carbonate Yes

Chloride Yes

Chromium No

Hydrogen Sulfide YesMemorandum

February 18 , 2016 Page 2

Table 1 . List of Parameters

Parameter Name Included in Analysis? (Yes/No)

Hydroxide Yes

Iron Yes

Lead No

Lithium Yes

Magnesium Yes

Mercury No

NaCl Equivalent Yes

Oil and Grease No

pH Yes

Potassium Yes

Radium No

Selenium No

Silver No

Sodium Yes

Sodium Adsorption Ratio Yes

Sulfate Yes

TDS Yes

Total Anions Yes

Total Cations Yes

Zinc No
Exhibit 31.2
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Phyllis A. Knight, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of ChampionEnterprises, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respectto the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have;
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared; b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered bythis report based on such evaluation; and c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: April 30, 2004 /s/  PHYLLIS A. KNIGHT   Phyllis A. Knight   Executive Vice President &Chief Financial Officer