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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001052635
<NAME>                        MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING V, L.P.

       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-25-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            DEC-27-1997
<PERIOD-END>                              JUN-26-1998
<CASH>                                              0
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    0
<PP&E>                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               0
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                        85
<COMMON>                                           15
<OTHER-SE>                                       (100)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        0
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    0
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     0
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                        0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
        


</TABLE>
## Martin , Michae l (OST ) From : ! v'^Ji^tN ! OMartin , Michae l (OST ) Sent : ; ripPQ R i ATiO^fiday , January20 , 201 2 12:2 8 P M To : ! : : I OPERAT(n^''?' ygriffith' ; 'mayor@hiwaay.net' ; 'steveh@shoalschamber.conn' ; 'itsinala@hiwaay.net' ; To m 1-ieanue' ; 'Joshu a Abramson' ; 'lrodgers@www.greenville.ms.us' ; 'mayor@hattiesburgms.com ' Cc : ':[]n •:r o - AJ,CipdyStorl<';'tsieber@seaportair.com';'ticooper@gosunair.com';'Bill yHawkins' ; Devany ,

i'L O - / A 

## %&\ k h(OST ) Subject : EA S proposal s fo rGreenville , Hattiesburg/Laurel , Muscl e Shoals , an d Tupel o Attachments : Blu e Skyproposa l EA S a tGL H PI B MS LTU P January2012.pdf ; Proposa l t o Provid e EA S a t Greenvill e M S Laure l Hattiesbur g M S Muscl e Shoal s A LTupel o M S DOT-OST-2008-020 9 DOT-OST-2001-1068 5 D0T-0ST-2.pdf ; SeaPortMSL-GLH-PIB-TU P Proposal s 18JAN201 2 - FINAL.pdf ; Su n Ai rEA S proposa l fo rGL H TU P MS LJa n 1 8 2012.pd f Everyone : I woul d lik e t o updat e yo u o n th e Essentia l Ai rServic e (EAS) situatio n a tMuscl e Shoals , Alabama , an d Greenville , Hattiesburg/Laurel , an d Tupelo , Mississippi , an d giv e yo u a n opportunit yt o offe ran ycomment s o n th e recor d befor e w e submi t a recommendatio n t o th e Assistan t Secretar yfo rAviatio n an d Internationa l Affairs

. W e issue d Orde r2011-11 - 29 , Novembe r23 , 2011 , solicitin g a secon d roun d o fproposal s fro m carrier s intereste d i n providin g replacemen tEA S fo r a ne wterm
. I n respons e t o ou rrequest , fou rairline s hav e submitte d proposals : Ai rChoic e One : proposin g t o serv e al l fou rcommunitie s Blu e Sk yAirlines : proposin g t o serv e al l fou rcommunitie s SeaPor t Airlines : proposin g t o serv e al l fou rcommunitie s Su n Air : proposin g t o serv e Greenville , Muscl e Shoal s an d Tupel o I hav e attache d eac h airline' s bi d fo ryou rreview
. Pleas e forwar d thi s e-mai l t o al l relevan tparitie s tha tI have no t include d o n th e distributio n list
. I expec t tha t eac h carrier' s proposa l shoul d b e uploade d o n www.regulations.go vby CO B today
. W e reques t tha t yo u revie wth e proposal s an d submi tan ycomment s yo u mayhav e soo n a s possible , bu tn o late rtha n Thursdav
. Februar v23
. Pleas e sen d you rcomment s vi a e-mai l t o EAS@dot.gov

. I fyo u have an yquestions , fee l fre e t o contac t me . Regards ,
Michae l Marti n Unite d State s Departmen t o fTransportatio n Offic e o fAviatio n Analysi s Essentia l Ai rServic e (EAS) an d Smal l Communit yAi rServic e Developmen tProgra m (SCASDP ) 

### (202 ) 366-649 4
**Part 1, Section I: Chart of Accounts**

The Chart of Accounts provides the basic structure for the U.S. Standard General Ledger (USSGL). It incorporates both proprietary and budgetary accounts. The proprietary and budgetary sets of general ledger accounts are self-balancing (the total debits equal total credits). It is important to note that central agency reporting requires a lower level of detail than the 6-digit USSGL account numbers provided. Therefore, the USSGL Board developed attributes containing various domain values that, when added to a basic 6-digit USSGL account, provide the appropriate level of detail needed for central agency reporting and, in effect, create new USSGL accounts. See Section IV for attribute definitions and domain values. It is this lower level of detail, the basic 6-digit USSGL account plus applicable attribute domain values, that agencies must capture at the transaction level to (1) comply with USSGL policy contained herein, and (2) achieve the desired result for proper reporting.

The basic 6-digit USSGL accounts are classified as follows:

**100000 Assets**

**200000 Liabilities**

**300000 Net Position**

**400000 Budgetary**

**500000 Revenue and Other Financing Sources 600000 Expenses**

**700000 Gains/Losses/Miscellaneous Items**

**800000 Memorandum**

Agencies may expand this numbering system to as many digits as necessary to accommodate agency- specific requirements. However, subsidiary accounts must summarize or “roll-up” to the 6-digit USSGL accounts plus any related attributes as defined herein.

In February 1999, the USSGL Board voted to delete summary accounts. However, agencies may summarize accounts as they find useful. Section headings replace many of the deleted summary accounts to maintain the integrity of the account structure.

Page 1 of 1

 (Part 1SUPPLEMENT) (Fiscal Year 2018 ReportingSection I) (U.S. Standard General LedgerChart of Accounts) (Account Number) (Normal Balance) (Title)

 (Bulletin No. 2018-08) (I CA - 10) (August 2018)

# image1.png
No. P68/264.

protests 63/13369, etc. (New York).

#### Novelty Import Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of batteries, classified as entireties with flashlights, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Torch Mfg.*Co., *Inc.*v. *United States*(57 Cust. Ct. 521, C.D. 2863), wherein said batteries were held to be separately *1048dutiable and that no separate value for each of said items had been returned by the appraiser, the protests were dismissed and the matter remanded to a single judge to determine the sepai’ate value of the flashlights and batteries in the manner provided by law. (28 U.S.C. § 2636(d).)
Before the Third Division,

October 17, 1947

No. 51965.

#### W. X. Huber Co. a/c Milnor, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 63596-K (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of trays, etc., similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Ignaz Strauss & Co.*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 342, C. D. 710). The claim at 40 percent under paragraph 339 was therefore sustained.
II 

Calendar No. 453 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4077 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

180 Steuart Street in San Francisco, California, as the ‘‘Dianne Feinstein Post Office’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 8, 2024 

Mr. PADILLA (for himself and Ms. BUTLER) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

AUGUST 1, 2024 

Reported by Mr. PETERS, without amendment 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 180 Steuart Street in San Francisco, California, as the ‘‘Dianne Feinstein Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DIANNE FEINSTEIN POST OFFICE. 

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

5 Postal Service located at 180 Steuart Street in San FranVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:01 Aug 02, 2024 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S4077.RS S4077

kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 4077 RS

1 cisco, California, shall be known and designated as the 

2 ‘‘Dianne Feinstein Post Office’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

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

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Dianne Feinstein Post 

7 Office’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB

kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Calendar No. 453 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4077 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office’’. Francisco, California, as the ‘‘Dianne Feinstein al Service located at 180 Steuart Street in San 

AUGUST 1, 2024 

Reported without amendment 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 1, 2014

t0924 

# Order

Clerk October 1, 2014

149177

NASIR ALI, MIR ASGHAR, and MID

M ICHIGAN AMBULATORY PHYSICIAN,

PLC d/b/a ADVANCE URGENT CARE &

WALK

- IN CLINIC,

Plaintiffs

- Appellants,

v SC: 149177

COA: 313939

Ingham CC: 11

- 001326

- CK

HORA S. LOLOEE,

Defendant

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 18, 2014

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
17.03 View an Administration Report
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 1882** 

BUTCH JOHNSON , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,
v. PALMETTO CITIZENS FEDERAL CREDIT UNION , Defendant

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Columbia
. Terry L. Wooten , Chief District Judge. ( 3:14

- cv - 01568

- TLW )

Submitted : November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Butch Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Butch Johnson appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss, after a 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (2012) review, Johnson’s claims alleging breach of contract and unfair trade practices by Palmetto Citizens Federal Credit Union
. We affirm
. The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845

- 46 (4th Cir. 1 985); see also Thomas
v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Moreover, we limit our review to the issues raised in the appellant’s informal brief
. S ee 4th Cir. R. 34(b)
. Johnson waived appellate review of the district court’s dispositive holdings by failing to fi le specific objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation after receiving proper notice , and by failing to challenge the district court’s dispositive holdings in his informal brief. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment . 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
Exhibit
      32.1




Certification
      of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      Section 1350 adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002.




In
      connection with the annual report of IEC Electronics Corp., (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008 as filed with Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the day hereof (the "Report"), I, W. Barry Gilbert,
      Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Michael R. Schlehr, Chief Financial
      Officer of the Company, 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 requirement 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 operations of the Company.




Dated:
                November 13, 2008
            */s/W.
                Barry Gilbert**W.
                Barry Gilbert**Chairman
                and**Chief
                Executive Officer**/s/Michael
                R. Schlehr**Michael
                R. Schlehr**Vice
                President and Chief**Financial
                Officer*





1
No. 48464.

#### Protests 803514-G, etc., of Abad Esteve Corp. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

N os. 04

- 22

- 00409

- CV, 04

- 22

- 00410

- CV

Jim KIRKLAND and Joe Kirkland, Appellants

v.

V & S TOTAL TRADE, LLC

, Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3

, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 2022CV01025, 2022CV01033

Honorable Kevin Henderson , Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ

, JUSTICE CHAPA , AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, the judgment s are VACATED IN PART and REVERSED AND RENDERED IN PART. We vacate the portion of the trial court’s judgment s pertaining to possession. We reverse the portion of the trial court’s judgments awarding attorney’s fees, and render judgment that Total Trade recover no attorney’s fees in each c ause. Costs of appeal are taxed against the party who incurred them.

SIGNED June 12 , 2024.

_____________________________ Irene Rios, Justice
----

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on i2010: Digital Libraries

(2006/C 229/07)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Communication from the European Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on I2010 — Digital libraries COM(2005) 465 final;

Having regard to the decision of its President of 24 January 2006 to instruct its Commission for Culture and Education to draw up an opinion on this subject;

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on i2010 — A European Information Society for Growth and Employment;

Having regard to the opinion of the Commission for Culture, Education and Research, adopted on 4 April 2006 (CdR 32/2006 rev. 1) (rapporteur: Mr Jyrki Myllyvirta, Mayor of Mikkeli (FI/EPP));

adopted the following opinion at its 65th plenary session, held on 14/15 June 2006 (meeting of 15 June):

1.   The Committee of the Regions' views

The Committee of the Regions

2.   The Committee of the Regions' recommendations

The Committee of the Regions,

Brussels, 15 June 2006

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Michel DELEBARRE

----
No. 51682.

#### Protests 27957-K, etc., of Quon Hing et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of kumquats similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Fung Chong Co.*(34 C. C. P. A. 40, C. A. D. 342). In accordance therewith the claim at 1 cent per pound under paragraph 743 was sustained.
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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL A. COX,

Petitioner,

v.

WARDEN, San Quentin State Prison,

Respondent.

No. 2:04-CV-0065 MCE CKD

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER

On April 15, 2015, petitioner filed a notice of request to seal and submitted the request 

and a document to the court for sealing. (ECF No. 147.) Petitioner states that respondent has 

been served with copies of those documents. Within five days of the filed date of this order, 

respondent shall submit a response to the request to seal by e-mailing it to 

ckdorders@caed.uscourts.gov.

Dated: April 22, 2015

Cox req to seal resp.or

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-00065-MCE-CKD Document 148 Filed 04/22/15 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:05-cr-00576-JS Document 243 Filed 10/04/07 Page 1 of 1
No. 51603.

#### Protests 83350-K, etc., of Frankel Importing Co. et al. (New York).

*169Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of beads similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Eitinger Bead Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(17 Cust. Ct. 56, C. D. 1020), and *Eitinger Bead Co.*v. *United States*(13 Cust. Ct. 50, C. D. 867). In accordance therewith the claim at 35 percent under paragraph 1503, or at 20 percent under the same paragraph, as modified by T. D. 49458, was sustained.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-4737

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ROBERT MCDONALD PARRIS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg,

District Judge. (CR-04-15)

Submitted: January 25, 2006 Decided: March 1, 2006

Before TRAXLER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Randolph Marshall Lee, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant.

Donald David Gast, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville,

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Robert McDonald Parris appeals his conviction and

ninety-four month sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to one

count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than

500 grams of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846 (2000).

Counsel has filed an Anders*

 brief in which he states that there

are no meritorious issues for appeal, but suggests that defense

counsel provided ineffective assistance at sentencing when he

argued for a sentence at the bottom of the Guideline range rather

than a more lenient sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(a)

(West 2000 & Supp. 2005). Parris was notified of his right to file

a pro se supplemental brief, but has not filed a brief.

Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are generally

not cognizable on direct appeal. See United States v. King, 119

F.3d 290, 295 (4th Cir. 1997). Rather, to allow for adequate

development of the record, a defendant must bring his claim in a

motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). See id.; United States v.

Hoyle, 33 F.3d 415, 418 (4th Cir. 1994). An exception exists when

the record conclusively establishes ineffective assistance. United

States v. Richardson, 195 F.3d 192, 198 (4th Cir. 1999). Our

review of the record leads us to conclude that any deficiencies in

counsel’s performance are not conclusively demonstrated.
- 3 -

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire

record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for

appeal. We therefore affirm Parris’s conviction and sentence.

This court requires that counsel inform Parris, in writing, of the

right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for

further review. If Parris requests that a petition be filed, but

counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then

counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from

representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof

was served on Parris.

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
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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Larry D. Alexander,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S 04-0823 DFL PAN P

vs. Findings and Recommendations

Stockton Police Dept., et al.,

Defendants.

-oOoPlaintiff is a state prisoner without counsel prosecuting a

civil rights action. He claims defendants violated his

constitutional rights by wrongfully convicting him and seeks

damages. He has not invalidated his conviction by habeas corpus

or other means.

March 16, 2005, the court ordered plaintiff to show cause

why this action is not barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477

(1994). Plaintiff did not respond. 

Plaintiff cannot proceed under the civil rights statute for

Case 2:04-cv-00823-DFL-PAN Document 5 Filed 05/31/05 Page 1 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

2

reasons explained in the March 16, 2005, order.

Accordingly, the court hereby recommends this action be

dismissed.

Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l), these

findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States

District Judge assigned to this case. Written objections may be

filed within 20 days of service of these findings and

recommendations. The document should be captioned “Objections to

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The district

judge may accept, reject, or modify these findings and

recommendations in whole or in part.

Dated: May 31, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00823-DFL-PAN Document 5 Filed 05/31/05 Page 2 of 2
Before the Third Division,

December 20, 1961

No. 66304.

#### Werner Strauss *& Co.*and Arthur J. Fritz *& Co. v.*United States,

protest 61/4792 (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

The protest was dismissed.