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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This financial data schedule contains summary financial information
extracted from the Company's nine months ended September 30, 1997
Consolidated Statement of Income and the Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheet.  This information is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000796370
<NAME> UNITED ASSET MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         164,304
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  160,560
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,371
<PP&E>                                          82,588
<DEPRECIATION>                                (47,545)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,545,180<F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          223,295
<BONDS>                                        722,942<F2>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           703
<OTHER-SE>                                     560,186
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,545,180
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               676,804
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  445,901
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                78,349<F3>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,796
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                    53,447
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             71,311
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    71,311
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .97
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .96
<FN>
<F1>Includes 1,127,668,000 of cost assigned to contracts acquired, net of
accumulated amortization.
<F2>Includes $175,500,000 in senior notes payable and 547,442,000 in subordinated
notes payable.
<F3>Represents amortization of costs assigned to contracts acquired.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit  4.1

             ------------------------------------------------------
               INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
             ------------------------------------------------------

------                                                           --------------
  No.                                                                 Shares
------                                                           --------------
                               The State of Nevada

[LOGO]
                              Bream Ventures, Inc.
        One Hundred Million Common Shares Authorized, $0.001 Par Value

This Certifies That SPECIMEN is the owner of ______________________ Common
Shares $0.001 par value each of the Capital Stock of

                              Bream Ventures, Inc.

transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person
or by Attorney upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed.

In Witness Whereof, the said corporation has caused this Certificate to be
signed by its duly authorized officers, and to be sealed with the Seal of the
Corporation this ______ day of _____________ At

[SEAL]


-------------------------                               -----------------------
       President                                               Secretary

                               -------- ---------
                               SHARES $0.001 EACH
                               -------- ---------


                                   CERTIFICATE
                                       FOR

                                     SHARES

                               [SEAL APPEARS HERE]

                                     OF THE

                                  CAPITAL STOCK


                              BREAM VENTURES, INC.

                                    ISSUED TO


                                      DATED



         For Value Received ______ hereby sell, assign and transfer unto ______
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
Shares of the Capital Stock represented by the written Certificate and do hereby
irrevocably constitute and appoint __________________________________________ to
transfer the said Stock on the books of the within named corporation with full
power of substitution in the premises.

Dated _________________________

In presence of _______________________

NOTICE. THE SIGNATURE OF THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN

ON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE, IN EVERY PARTICULAR WITHOUT ALTERATION AND
ENLARGEMENTS OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER
Exhibit 31.1
                          CERTIFICATION

I, Greg Amato, certify that:

     1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB
of Epolin, Inc.;

     2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue statements of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

     3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and
other financial information included in this report, fairly
present in all material respects the financial condition, results
of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for,
the periods presented in this report;

     4.   The small business issuer's other certifying officers
and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-
15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

          (a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,
or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;

          (b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business
issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this
report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by
this report based on such evaluation; and

          (c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the small
business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonable likely to
materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control
over financial reporting; and

     5.   The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s)
and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of
internal control over financial reporting, to the small business
issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

          (a)  All significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonable likely to adversely
affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

          (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the
small business issuer's internal control over financial
reporting.


Dated: October 15, 2007            By: /s/ Greg Amato
                                   Greg Amato,
                                   Chief Executive Officer
                                   (Principal Executive Officer)
#### OUSBORN et al. v. PEPSI-COLA BOTTLING CO. et al.

No. 30824.

July 13, 1942.

127 P. 2d 854.

*227Dickerson & Nathan, of Tulsa, for plaintiffs in error.

A. M. Covington and Pierce & Rucker, all of Tulsa, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a proceeding in garnishment in aid of execution. The original judgment was obtained in the justice of the peace court of E. D. Carmichael, of Tulsa, Okla., and a transcript of the judgment was filed in the district court. The proceeding in aid of execution was commenced by the issuance of summons to J. D. Branham and the Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company. On January 13, 1942, motion to quash was filed and the case was transferred to the court of common pleas, and on the 17th day of January, 1942, the court sustained the motion to quash as to the defendant J. D. Branham and overruled the same as to the defendant Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company.

The plaintiffs have appealed from the order discharging garnishment summons as to J. D. Branham. A motion to dismiss has been filed for the reason that the appeal must be perfected within 30 days. The appeal was filed in this court the 17th day of February, 1942. The motion must be sustained.

Under the provisions of 12 O. S. 1941 §§ 863 and 864, the proceedings as directed by 12 O. S. 1941 § 865 shall be the same as an attachment proceeding. It is the universal rule of this court that attachment proceedings and garnishment proceedings are the same so far as it is provided that the appeal in question shall be taken within 30 days.

The sole question presented arises on a motion to quash the garnishment. In Tidal Pipe Line Co. v. Daugherty, 187 Okla. 468, 103 P. 2d 534, we said:

> “Where an appeal is taken from an order dissolving a garnishment, such an appeal under section 555, O. S. 1931, 12 Okla. St. Ann. § 983, must be filed in this court within 30 days from date of order, and this rule applies notwithstanding the order to dissolve is entered upon a verdict of a jury or a judgment of the court after trial of the garnishment proceedings upon the merits.”

The appeal is dismissed.

WELCH, C. J., and RILEY, OSBORN, BAYLESS, GIBSON, and DAVISON, JJ., concur. CORN, V. C. J., and HURST and ARNOLD, JJ., absent.
#### Eleanor M. Hamilton, an Infant, Etc., Plaintiff, *v.*J. Eberhard Faber et al., Defendants.

(Supreme Court, New York Special Term,

November, 1900.)

1. Action by a beneficiary for an accounting, etc.— All trustees necessary parties — Demurrer to complaint.

Where a beneficiary sues for an accounting by his trustees and for the removal of one of them, all of them, who have acted, and who have not been discharged, are necessary, parties to the action.

8. Same — Defense of another action pending not established.

The defense of another action pending between the same parties for the same cause cannot be made a ground of demurrer to such a complaint where it does not show that the parties are the same in both actions or proceedings, nor that the whole purpose of the second action or proceeding was attainable in the first.

Issues of law upon demurrer to complaint.

Thomas Allison and Morris A. Tyng, for plaintiff.

George ZabrisMe, for defendant-demurrant.

Bischoff, J.

The action is brought by a beneficiary for an accounting by trustees, and, as part of the relief, the removal of one is sought, upon sufficient allegations. Irrespective of the sufficiency of the allegations of the complaint, as to other matters touching the acts of the demurring trustees, a cause of action, as against them, is stated, for they are necessary parties to the action to remove their co-trustee, and, at least, so far, the complaint is proof against their demurrer.

In such an action, the rule is that all trustees who have acted as *65such, and have not been discharged, should be joined as parties. 2 Perry Trusts (5th ed.), § 876.

One demurrant takes the further ground that the pendency of a special proceeding for his discharge, which is set forth in the •complaint, discloses “ another action pending,” but clearly this ground is untenable.

Rot only does the complaint fail to show that the parties’ to the proceeding are the same (Code, § 488, subd. 4), but it is disclosed "by the allegations that the plaintiff cannot obtain complete relief in that proceeding, while, to render this ground of demurrer availing, it must appear that “ the whole purpose of the second suit was attainable in the first.” Parker v. Selye, 3 App. Div. 149.

The claim that the executors of Charles Kennedy Hamilton (through whom these trustees derived title to the corporate interests .as to which mismanagement is charged) should be made parties, appears to be without foundation.

Assuming, with the demurrant, that these executors retained some interest in the properties, no claim is made against them, nór in their favor, by the plaintiff, to recover property in their behalf. The plaintiff seeks only her share in the avails of properties which the executors did transfer to the trustees, and the presence of the •executors is certainly not necessary to a determination of what the trustees received.

Demurrers overruled, with costs; leave to plead over on usual terms.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND> THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
         EXTRACTED FROM THE NATIONAL HEALTH & SAFETY CORPORATION 
         FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996
         AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
         FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
<MULTIPLIER>  1
       
<S>                           <C>  
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 YEAR 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-1-1996
<PERIOD-END>                  DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                        161,503  
<SECURITIES>                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                 88,120
<ALLOWANCES>                  48,212
<INVENTORY>                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              201,411  
<PP&E>                        165,799
<DEPRECIATION>                129,343
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                781,543
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         2,810,415
<BONDS>                       316,887
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         14
<PREFERRED>                   0
<COMMON>                      21,146
<OTHER-SE>                    6,227,239
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  781,543
<SALES>                       207,921
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              207,921
<CGS>                         56,452
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 1,782,742
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              45,212
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            298,478
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (1,974,963)
<INCOME-TAX>                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (1,974,963)
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  (1,974,963)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                 (.09)
        

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM
EPOLIN, INC.'S QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MAY 31, 1998
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  FEB-28-1999
<PERIOD-END>                       MAY-31-1998
<CASH>                             417,887
<SECURITIES>                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                      199,697
<ALLOWANCES>                       0
<INVENTORY>                        366,948
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   1,136,923
<PP&E>                             1,072,917
<DEPRECIATION>                     586,988
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     1,781,848
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              48,678
<BONDS>                            0
<COMMON>                           2,216,983
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>              0
<PREFERRED>                        0
<OTHER-SE>                         0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       1,781,848
<SALES>                            302,377
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   302,377
<CGS>                              105,832
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      105,832
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                   156,260
<LOSS-PROVISION>                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    44,156
<INCOME-TAX>                       406
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                43,750
<DISCONTINUED>                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                    0
<CHANGES>                          0
<NET-INCOME>                       43,750
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                      .00


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-10234

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MANUEL ESCAMILLA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:13-CR-274-2

Before REAVLEY, PRADO, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Manuel Escamilla, federal prisoner # 08945-062, appeals the district 

court’s order denying his motion to correct the record pursuant to Federal Rule 

of Criminal Procedure 36. He argues that the district court miscalculated his 

total offense level, which resulted in an incorrect amended guidelines range, in 

the order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion. Escamilla also raises 

 

* 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

January 18, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 17-10234 Document: 00514312587 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/18/2018
No. 17-10234

2

sentencing errors based on Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016), and 

Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013).

In cases where there are no factual disputes, we review a district court’s 

denial of a Rule 36 motion de novo. United States v. Mackay, 757 F.3d 195, 

197 (5th Cir. 2014). Under Rule 36, the district “court may at any time correct 

a clerical error in a judgment, order, or other part of the record, or correct an 

error in the record arising from oversight or omission.” FED. R. CRIM. P. 36. 

However, the rule applies only to clerical errors and not substantive matters. 

Mackay, 757 F.3d at 197-200. The record does not reflect that there is any

error, clerical or otherwise, concerning the calculation of Escamilla’s total 

offense level. The proposed change to his total offense level sought by 

Escamilla is substantive, rather than clerical, in nature and could not be made 

under Rule 36. See Mackay, 757 F.3d at 200; see also United States v. BuendiaRangel, 553 F.3d 378, 379 (5th Cir. 2008). Additionally, Escamilla’s Mathis 

and Alleyene claims are challenging sentencing errors to which correction 

under Rule 36 does not apply. See Mackay, 757 F.3d at 200. 

Accordingly, the district court’s denial of Escamilla’s motion to correct 

the record pursuant to Rule 36 is AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 17-10234 Document: 00514312587 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/18/2018
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

# Agency Holding the Meeting: 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 

# Time and Date:

10:00 a.m., Wednesday, April 26, 2000. 

# Place:

Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, 20th and C Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551.

# Status:

Closed. 

      ( print page 21434)    

# Matters to be Considered:

  

1. Personnel actions (appointments, promotions, assignments, reassignments, and salary actions) involving individual Federal Reserve System employees. 

2. Any matters carried forward from a previously announced meeting. 

# Contact Person for More Information:

Lynn S. Fox, Assistant to the Board; 202-452-3204. 

# Supplementary Information:

You may call 202-452-3206 beginning at approximately 5 p.m. two business days before the meeting for a recorded announcement of bank and bank holding company applications scheduled for the meeting; or you may contact the Board's Web site at http://www.federalreserve.gov for an electronic announcement that not only lists applications, but also indicates procedural and other information about the meeting.

Dated: April 19, 2000. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Associate Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 00-10078 Filed 4-19-00; 10:32 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6433
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIE JAMES RICHARDSON, a/k/a Riz, a/k/a Raheem, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CR-97-121) Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 18, 1999Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Willie James Richardson, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Willie James Richardson appeals the district court’s order denying his “Motion to Release Records on Appeal.” We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Richardson , No. CR-97-121 (E.D. Va. Feb. 24, 1999). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED