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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Article 5 Fin. Data Schedule for 1st Qtr 10-QSB
</LEGEND>

<S>                                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   		3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          			DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   			 MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                 	105260
<SECURITIES>                                     		0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 			1187825
<ALLOWANCES>                                 			15000
<INVENTORY>                                     		2495510
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          			4117285
<PP&E>                                                 	2132985
<DEPRECIATION>                               			1400160
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                			4948101
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  				1124024
<BONDS>                                             		0
<COMMON>                                          		42984
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>            					0
<PREFERRED>                                      		0
<OTHER-SE>                                          		3737343
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 						4948101
<SALES>                                                 	1917570
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          			917570
<CGS>                                                     	1201628
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  			1201628
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           			0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             			0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       				1622
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            			(302992)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    		(136000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    				(166992)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 			0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             			0
<CHANGES>                                           		 0
<NET-INCOME>                                      		(166992)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     		(.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     		 (.04)


</TABLE>
#### Otto J. Bueb, Respondent, *v.*Annie M. Geraty et al., Appellants.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff.

E. T. Oldham, for appellants.

E. F. Stern, for respondent.

McCarthy, J.

The Connery mortgage was certainly void, it not having been filed in Kings county where one of the firm resided. This said mortgage was void as against creditors of the mortgagors and against subsequent purchasers in good faith. Laws-1833, chap: 279, § 1. , See, also, 101 U. S. 731.

The direction of the trial justice in plaintiff’s favor was correct.'

Scotchman and Olcott, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. .
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-7615

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

LORENZO BUTTS, a/k/a Lorenza Butts, a/k/a Lorenzo Butts, Jr.,

Defendant - Appellant.

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

Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:00-cr-00067-AWA-1)

Submitted: May 10, 2022 Decided: May 17, 2022

Before MOTZ, HARRIS, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lorenzo Butts, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Attias, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE 

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Lorenzo Butts appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3582(c)(1)(A) motion for compassionate release. This court remanded the court’s 

original order denying Butts’ motion because it had relied in part on an erroneous factual 

premise. The court reevaluated Butts’ motion on remand and denied relief. We review a 

court’s order granting or denying a compassionate release motion for abuse of discretion. 

United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir.) (stating standard of review), cert. 

denied, 142 S. Ct. 383 (2021). We have reviewed the record and conclude that the court 

did not abuse its discretion. The court denied compassionate release after assuming Butts 

had demonstrated extraordinary and compelling circumstances and reviewing the 

applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. See United States v. High, 997 F.3d 181, 188-91 

(4th Cir. 2021) (discussing amount of explanation required for denial of straightforward 

compassionate release motion).

We therefore affirm the district court’s order. We deny Butts’ motion to appoint 

counsel and to accelerate case processing. 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.

AFFIRMED
Form Approve d . OMB Nos. 20 7 0-0060; 2 0 70-0057; 2 0 70-0107

UNITE D STA TES ENV IRONMENTA L PROTECTI ON AGENCY

120 0 Pe nn sylv an ia Av en ue , N.W

. WASHING TON , D.C. 20460
Paperwor

k Red uction Act Not ice: The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.25 hours per response for reg istration a ctivitie s and 0.25 hours pe r response for reregistrati on and specia l review activit ies, includi

ng time for rea ding the inst

ructions and completi ng the nec essary

forms . Send com

ments r egarding the burden es

timate or any ot her aspec t of this c ollection of

inform ation, including suggest ions for re ducing the bur

den to: Dire ctor, Collec

tion Strateg

ies Divi sion (2822T), U .S. Environm ental Protec

tion Age ncy, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20460. Do not send the form to this address.



### SELF-CERTIFIC ATION STATEMEN T FOR THE PHYSIC AL/CHE MICAL PROP ERTIES (PR N OTICE 98- 1) Product Name: Reg. No./File Sy

mbol No. (if known) or Company N o. 

### SELF-CERTIFICATION STATE MENT : I certify that the reported information on the “Summary Form” represents a true and a ccurate record of the test r esults of s tudies g enerat

ed or owned by

(Company

Name): and that the values of the properties reported ar e reliable. I further ce

rtify that such data were generated in substantial confor mity with OPPTS Test Guideline Series 830 Product Properties, applicable to my product, and in effect at the time of submission. As a condition of registration, EPA may , by order, ( 1) withdraw a pending registration, (2) suspend the registration of this product without opportunity f or hearing, or (3) assess civil penalties provide d for in section 14 of FIFRA for

violations of section 12(a)(2)(N) of FI FRA without opportunity for hea ring, if I have

not submitted t

o EPA within

thirty (30) day s of rec eipt of a

request by t he Age ncy , or within

a specif ied time agreed to by

the Agency , test results of studies summarized in the “Summary Form.” As a condition of registration, EPA may , by order, ( 1) withdraw a pending registration, (2) suspend the registration of this product without opportunity f or hearing, or (3) assess civil penalties provide d for in section 14 of FI FRA for v

iolations o f section s 12(a)(2)(N), 1 2(a)(2 )(Q), or 12(a)( 2)(R) of

FIF RA without o

pportunit y for hearing, if I

fail to provide to EPA within thirty (30) day s of receipt of a notification of error, or w ithin a specified time agreed to by the Agency , information that EPA determines is required to correct the err or. Type Applicant’ s Name:

Title: Telephone No.
Applicant’s Signature: Date:

EPA F orm 8570 -37 (12- 2003)

Attach-2
```

[107th Congress Public Law 124]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ124.107]

[[Page 115 STAT. 2402]]

Public Law 107-124
107th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To provide for work <<NOTE: Jan. 16, 2002 -  [H.R. 2277]>> authorization 
    for nonimmigrant spouses of treaty traders and treaty investors.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 214(e) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(e)) is amended by 
adding at the end the following:
    ``(6) In the case of an alien spouse admitted under section 
101(a)(15)(E), who is accompanying or following to join a principal 
alien admitted under such section, the Attorney General shall authorize 
the alien spouse to engage in employment in the United States and 
provide the spouse with an `employment authorized' endorsement or other 
appropriate work permit.''.

    Approved January 16, 2002.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 2277:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 107-187 (Comm. on the Judiciary).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 147 (2001):
            Sept. 5, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 20, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
<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 Quarterly Report of McRae Industries, Inc.
         (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending November 2, 2002
         as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
         hereof (the "Report"), I, Marvin G. Kiser,  Sr., Vice  President of
         Finance of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss 1350, as
         adopted pursuant to ss 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.



         /s/Marvin G. Kiser, Sr.
         ---------------------------
         Marvin G. Kiser, Sr.
         Vice President of Finance

         December 17, 2002
From: azitazit@gmail.com [mailto:azitazit@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Matt Tyler 

Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 3:29 AM 

To: EAS (OST) 

Subject: Great lakes Air, Page AZ 

Hello, 

My name is Matthew Tyler, I am an emergency room doctor; I travel from Phoenix to 

Page, Arizona on a monthly basis For work. Due to the unreliability of Great Lakes 

airline, I am unable to fly, and required to make the 4-5 Hour drive each time that I travel 

back and forth. Not the end of the world, but airline service IS OFFERED to/from 

phoenix ·and page. In less than 6 attempts to fly with Great Lakes air, three of my trips 

were either canceled or left me having to seek other means of returning to Phoenix/page. 

This put a significant amount of stress on the physician schedule, as we only have one 

doctor working at a time in page, most of whom travel from phoenix. 

I found that Great Lakes services/contract were retained in page, despite their terrible 

track record, and despite other airlines offering competition - an airline with much better 

track records in terms of time flights and cancellations. This was clearly not in the best 

interest ofthe community, and was pursued due to personal interests. I advocate for and 

welcome the departure of great lakes air and a new provider.. 

Matthew Tyler DO 

989-400-114 7
§ 1.466 Security for records. ( a ) Written records which are subject to §§ 1.460 through 1.499 of this part must be maintained in a secure room, locked file cabinet, safe or other similar container when not in use. Access to information stored in computers will be limited to authorized VA employees who have a need for the information in performing their duties. These security precautions shall be consistent with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a).
( b ) Each VA facility shall adopt in writing procedures related to the access to and use of records which are subject to §§ 1.460 through 1.499 of this part.
[60 FR 63929, Dec. 13, 1995, as amended at 85 FR 64043, Oct. 9, 2020]
- Office Home
- About Us
- Defining Racial Equity
- Remarks and Releases
- Global Anti-Racism Champions
- Key Stakeholders
- FAQs

HomeOffice of the Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice...Remarks and Releases–Office of the Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice

# 						Remarks and Releases–Office of the Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice					

37 items
Clear All Filters

## View collection by:

Select a Year202420232022

Select a MonthJanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember

Select a SpeakerAntony J. BlinkenDesirée Cormier SmithMatthew Miller

Select a LocationBelgiumBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilCanadaColombiaGuatemalaHondurasLithuaniaMexicoSouth AfricaSri LankaSwitzerlandUnited KingdomUnited States

Select a Release TypeDipNoteDipNote: Human Rights and DemocracyMedia NoteNotice to the PressPress StatementRemarksU.S. Embassy ReleaseU.S. Mission Release

Select a Bureau/OfficeBureau of African AffairsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborBureau of European and Eurasian AffairsBureau of Global Public AffairsBureau of International Organization AffairsBureau of South and Central Asian AffairsBureau of Western Hemisphere AffairsOffice of Diversity and InclusionOffice of International Religious FreedomOffice of the Special Envoy To Monitor and Combat AntisemitismOffice of the Special Representative for Racial Equity and JusticeOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

          -    Media Note  		United States Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice Desirée Cormier Smith Visits Mexico	  November 27, 2022 
          -    Remarks  		SRREJ Cormier Smith Opening Remarks Film Screening “Who We Are: A Chronicle of Racism in America”	  Desirée Cormier SmithNovember 17, 2022 
          -    Remarks  		SRREJ Cormier Smith Press Remarks International Day for People of African Descent Foreign Press Center	  Desirée Cormier SmithAugust 31, 2022 
          -    U.S. Mission Release  		Opening Statement by Desirée Cormier Smith	  August 11, 2022 
          -    U.S. Embassy Release  		This U.S. Diplomat Fights Systemic Racism Worldwide	  August 9, 2022 
          -    Media Note  		U.S. Delegation to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination	  August 9, 2022 
          -    Press Statement  		Appointment of Desirée Cormier Smith as the Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice	  June 17, 2022 

previous page1234

Back to Top
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

#### § 41.7 Management of the record.

(a) The Board may expunge any paper directed to a Board proceeding, or filed while an application or patent is under the jurisdiction of the Board, that is not authorized under this part or in a Board order, or that is filed contrary to a Board order.

(b) A party may not file a paper previously filed in the same Board proceeding, not even as an exhibit or appendix, without Board authorization or as required by rule.
Opinion issued November 21 , 2017

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01 - 16 - 00899 - CV

——————————— WEATHERFORD U.S., L. P. , Appella nt

V. SPITZER INDUSTRIES, INC. , Appell e e On Appeal from the 80th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 2014 - 02648
MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Weatherford U.S., L.P., has filed an unopposed motion to dismiss this appeal. No opinion has issued in this appeal. Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.1(a)(1). We dismiss any other pending motions as moot.2 PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Bland
.
#### § 493.1210 Condition: Routine chemistry.

If the laboratory provides services in the subspecialty of Routine chemistry, the laboratory must meet the requirements specified in §§ 493.1230 through 493.1256, § 493.1267, and §§ 493.1281 through 493.1299.
#### § 1.655 Government license in invention of employee.

If an invention is made by an employee and it is determined that the employee inventor is entitled to full ownership under 37 CFR 501.6, subject to a nonexclusive, irrevocable, royalty-free license in the Government with power to grant sublicenses for all Governmental purposes, it shall be the duty of the employee inventor to notify the Office of General Counsel of the status of the patent application, including the patent application number, so that the Department may protect the interests reserved to the Government under 37 CFR 501.6.

[61 FR 29658, June 12, 1996]
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Marvin G. Kiser, Sr., certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of McRae Industries, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and15d-14) for the registrant and have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting;
5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
17

 

   affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.
Date: June 24, 2005   /s/ Marvin G. Kiser, Sr.     Marvin G. Kiser, Sr.  Vice President of Finance  
18
#### Barrentine *v.*The State.

*Violating Prohibition Lmo.*

(Decided Jan. 30, 1912.

57 South. 1025.)

1. *Appeal and lirror; Insufficient Presentation;*Affirmance.— Where the record on appeal contains no bill of exceptions, and the certificate of the clerk shows that the time for filing the bill of exceptions has expired, and the verdict and judgment is regular on its face, and there is no other error in the record, the cause will be affirmed.

2. *Costs; Hard Labor; Rate.*— Where the judgment fails to show the amount of the costs or the number of days necessary for the defendant to pay costs, the judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded that the judgment may be corrected so as to specify the allowance of cost at the rate of 75 cents per day.

Appeal from Walker Law and Equity Court.

Heard before Hon. T. L. Sowell.

Joe Barrentine was convicted of violating the prohibition law and he appeals.

Judgment of conviction affirmed and the cause remanded for proper correction.

No counsel marked for appellant,

N. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the state.

There is no error apparent of record except the judgment and sentence, and this court will correct that or remand for proper *sentence.*— Dar *ring ton v. The State,*87 Ala, 1; *Johnson v. The State,*94 Ala. 35; *Dowling v. City of Troy,*56 South. 116.

PELHAM, J.

The defendant was convicted of violating the prohibition law. The record contains no' bill of exceptions, and the certificate of the clerk shows that the time for filing has expired. The judgment of conviction and sentence imposing a fine of $75 is regular, *189and is based on a verdict finding tbe defendant gnilty and assessing a fine of that amount; but tbe judgment fails to show the amount of costs, or the number of days necessary for the defendant to perform hard labor for the county in default of paying or securing the costs, although the judgment entry shows the costs were not paid or secured.

The judgment of the court determining the guilt of the defendant and the sentence on default in payment of the fine is affirmed. In order that the court below may specify in the judgment the amount of costs, number of days, and sum allowed for each day, and pronounce the proper sentence of hard labor imposed for costs, the case is remanded.—Code 1907, § 7635; *Dowling v. City of Troy,*1 Ala. App. 508, 56 South. 116; *Evans v. State,*109 Ala. 11, 19 South. 535; *Johnson v. State,*94 Ala. 35, 10 South. 667; *Herrington v. State,*87 Ala. 1, 5 South. 831; *Walker v. State,*58 Ala. 393.

Affirmed in part, and reversed and remanded in part.
P.1 

OAR Box 1107 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

59) IV-B-9 

Docket Number: 

A-81-21 

Printed 4/11/2008 3:03:47 PM Sheet 59 of 90 
P.2 

A-81- 2 

IV-B-9 

Pending Confidential 

The following information is located in the confidential 

files of the Director, Emission Standards and Engineering 

Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, 

North Carolina. This information is confidential, pending 

final determination by the Administrator, and 1s not available for public inspection. 

Letter,- dated September 3, 1985, from K.K. Fidler, Radian Corporation, 

to file. This 3-page item contains information about emissions and 

control costs for open-ended lines.