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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         1060216
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2446621
<ALLOWANCES>                                    689625
<INVENTORY>                                     530369
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3484023
<PP&E>                                         5400953
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2156708
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 9617621
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2044348
<BONDS>                                         254888
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                      53742005
<OTHER-SE>                                  (46423620)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   9617621
<SALES>                                        2325600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2325600
<CGS>                                          1101536
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2137154
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (16183)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               60852
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 151365
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             151365
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    151365
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03
        

</TABLE>
No. 49335.

#### Protests 68766-K, etc., of Dr. Ida M. Stein et al. (Baltimore, etc.).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 394 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 394

Expressing the sense of the Senate that all people in the United States 
 should participate in a moment of silence to reflect upon the service 
 and sacrifice of members of the Armed Forces both at home and abroad.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 9, 2006

Ms. Stabenow submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of the Senate that all people in the United States 
 should participate in a moment of silence to reflect upon the service 
 and sacrifice of members of the Armed Forces both at home and abroad.

Whereas it was through the brave and noble efforts of the forefathers of the 
        United States that the United States first gained freedom and became a 
        sovereign country;
Whereas there are more than 1,300,000 active component and more than 1,100,000 
        reserve component members of the Armed Forces serving the Nation in 
        support and defense of the values and freedom that all people in the 
        United States cherish;
Whereas the members of the Armed Forces deserve the utmost respect and 
        admiration of the people of the United States for putting their lives in 
        danger for the sake of the freedoms enjoyed by all people of the United 
        States;
Whereas members of the Armed Forces are defending freedom and democracy around 
        the globe and are playing a vital role in protecting the safety and 
        security of all the people of the United States;
Whereas the United States officially celebrates and honors the accomplishments 
        and sacrifices of veterans, patriots, and leaders who fought for 
        freedom, but does not yet officially pay tribute to those who currently 
        serve in the Armed Forces;
Whereas all people of the United States should participate in a moment of 
        silence to support the troops; and
Whereas March 26th, 2006, is designated as ``National Support the Troops Day'': 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that all people in the 
United States should participate in a moment of silence to reflect upon 
the service and sacrifice of members of the Armed Forces both at home 
and abroad.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 281 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 281

               Honoring and thanking James Patrick Rohan.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 19, 2005

     Mr. Frist (for himself and Mr. Reid) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
               Honoring and thanking James Patrick Rohan.

Whereas Assistant Chief of Police James Patrick Rohan, a native of the State of 
        Maryland, has served the United States Capitol Police for thirty (30) 
        years with distinction having been appointed as a Private on December 8, 
        1975;
Whereas Assistant Chief Rohan, having risen through the ranks to his current 
        poisition over his longstanding career, has been instrumental in a 
        variety of initiatives designed to enhance the security of the Congress; 
        and
Whereas Assistant Chief Rohan, who holds a Master of Science Degree in Justice/
        Law Enforcement from the American University and a Bachelor of Arts 
        Degree in Law Enforcement from the University of Maryland, as well as 
        numerous specialized law enforcement and security training 
        accomplishments and honors: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate hereby honors and thanks James Patrick 
Rohan and his wife, Cecilia, and children, Ben, Natalie, Eric and 
David, and his entire family, for a lifelong professional commitment of 
service to the United States Capitol Police and the United States 
Congress.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 12




                                  TRANSAMERICA CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
                              COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES




                                                 Nine months ended September 30,
                                                    1997                 1996
                                                  (Dollar amounts in thousands)

Fixed charges:
    Interest and debt expense                       $  418,292        $  514,375
    One-third of rental expense                         29,151            18,144
    Dividends declared on preferred
       securities issued by affiliates                  29,975            12,843
                                                    ----------        ----------
Total                                                  477,418        $  545,362
                                                    ==========        ==========

Earnings:
    Net income                                      $  618,916        $  335,127
    Provision for income taxes                         290,054            66,581
    Fixed charges                                      477,418           545,362
                                                    ----------        ----------
Total                                               $1,386,388        $  947,070
                                                    ==========        ==========

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                        2.90              1.74
                                                          ====              ====
#### Gondrand Transport Corp. et al. *v.*United States

No. 7395.

Invoices dated London, England, May 23, 1946, etc.

Certified May 24, 1946, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., July 9, 1946, etc.

Entry Nos. 702259; 719217.

(Decided October 3, 1947)

*Brooks & Brooks*for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrence, Judge.

It has been agreed between the parties hereto that the issues herein relating to the above-mentioned merchandise are the same in all material respects as those decided in *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*33 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 183, C. A. D. 334, and that the record therein may be incorporated herein.

Upon the agreed facts I find the export value, as defined in section 402 (d), Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for determining the values of said merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement enumerated on the annexed schedule which is marked “A” and made part of this decision, and that such values are the appraised values, less additions made by importers on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-2390

___________ Wayne King, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Appeal from the United States Marilyn Johnson, * District Court for the * Western District of Arkansas. Appellee, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Charles Beavers, * * Defendant. *

___________ Submitted: April 23, 1999 Filed: April 30, 1999

___________ Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. WayneKing brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Marilyn Johnson and Deputy Sheriff Charles Beavers. The background facts are summarized in our earlier decision granting Sheriff Beavers qualified immunity from King's claims. See King v. Beavers , 148 F. 3d 1031 (8th Cir.), cert. denied , 119 S. Ct. 513 (1998).1 The HONORABLE H. FRANKLIN WATERS, United States District Judge

for the Western District of Arkansas. -2- While that appeal was pending, the district court 1 granted Johnson & s motion for summary judgment and entered judgment dismissing the action as to her. King appeals that decision. However, at the time King appealed, there was no judgment disposing of the claims against Beavers, and King did not obtain from the district courtthe express determination necessary to permit immediate appeal of the judgment dismissing Johnson. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). Accordingly, there is no appealable final order, and we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
(Reap. Dec. 8806)

#### United States *v.*John D. Winchester

Entry No. 170.

(Decided May 21, 1957)

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the plaintiff.

Defendant not represented by counsel.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement relates to certain jade oxide that was exported from London, England, and entered at the port of Galveston, Tex.

The case has been submitted on an agreed set of facts which establish that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is export value, as defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, and that such statutory value for all of the items is “US $146.65K per one hundred pounds, net packed, less haulage of £48-18-9 (Pounds Sterling),” and I so hold.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                       1,713,044
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  401,791
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    862,937
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,205,356
<PP&E>                                       2,618,843
<DEPRECIATION>                                 194,881
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              27,681,602
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,354,950
<BONDS>                                     12,044,084
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           83,359
<PREFERRED>                                  1,052,988
<COMMON>                                     5,047,129
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,013,696
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                27,681,602
<SALES>                                      1,876,175
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,876,175
<CGS>                                        1,523,967
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,523,967
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,012,191
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             317,528
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                479,922
<INCOME-TAX>                                    17,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            465,068
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   465,068
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CEO PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Trinity Capital Corporation, a New Mexicocorporation (the “Company”), for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),William C. Enloe, as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of myknowledge:

 

(1)          TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Trinity CapitalCorporation and will be retained by Trinity Capital Corporation and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
| /s/ WILLIAM  C. ENLOE                  |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| William C.  Enloe                      |
| President  and Chief Executive Officer |
| April 30,  2004                        |

 

1

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

RACHEL M. BORDER, : Case No. 2:12-CV-0379 

 : 

 Plaintiff, : JUDGE ALGENON L. MARBLEY 

 : 

 v. : 

 : Magistrate Judge King 

COMMISSIONER OF : 

SOCIAL SECURITY, : 

 : 

 Defendant. : 

 

OPINION AND ORDER 

On June 6, 2013, the United States Magistrate Judge recommended that the decision of 

the Commissioner be reversed and that the action be remanded to the Commissioner of Social 

Security for further consideration of the opinions of Plaintiff’s treating provider. Report and 

Recommendation, Doc. 20. Although the parties were advised of their right to object to the 

recommendation and of the consequences of their failure to do so, there has nevertheless been no 

objection. 

The Report and Recommendation, Doc. No. 20, is ADOPTED AND AFFIRMED. The 

decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and the action is REMANDED to the 

Commissioner of Social Security, pursuant to Sentence 4 of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further 

consideration of the opinions of Plaintiff’s treating provider. 

The Clerk shall enter FINAL JUDGMENT pursuant to Sentence 4 of 42 U.S.C. 

§ 405(g). 

s/Algenon L. Marbley_________ 

ALGENON L. MARBLEY 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

DATE: September 12, 2013

Case: 2:12-cv-00379-ALM-NMK Doc #: 21 Filed: 09/12/13 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
AO 450 (Rev. 5/85) Judgment in a Civil Case

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Eastern Division 

RHONDA SUE KERSHNER,

Plaintiff,

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

v.

CASE NO. 2:13-CV-00065

COMMISSIONER OF JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.

SOCIAL SECURITY, MAGISTRATE JUDGE TERENCE P. KEMP

Defendant.

Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have

been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict.

Decision by Court. A decision has been rendered by the Court without a hearing or trial.

Pursuant to the ORDER filed December 16, 2013, JUDGMENT is hereby entered

remanding this case to the Commissioner of Social Security, pursuant to Sentence 4 of 42

U.S.C. § 405(g), for further proceedings.

Date: December 16, 2013 JOHN P. HEHMAN, CLERK

/S/ Andy F. Quisumbing 

(By) Andy F. Quisumbing

 Courtroom Deputy Clerk

Case: 2:13-cv-00065-EAS-TPK Doc #: 18 Filed: 12/16/13 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-19-00401-CR

TRINIDAD ALVARADO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

§

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 297th District Court

of Tarrant County (1542459D)

November 4, 2021

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Walker

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no reversible error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment 

of the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Brian Walker

 Justice Brian Walker
OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE







This Officer’s Certificate is furnished pursuant to Section 2.11 of that certain Servicing Supplement dated as of September 23, 2010 (the “Servicing Agreement”), among BMW Financial Services NA, LLC, as Seller, Servicer, Administrator and Custodian, Citibank, N.A., as Indenture Trustee, BMW Auto Leasing LLC, as Depositor, and the BMW Vehicle Lease Trust 2010-1 as Issuer (all capitalized terms used herein without definition have the respective meanings specified in the Servicing Agreement).





THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY CERTIFIES THAT:





1.             I am a duly authorized officer of the Servicer;





2.             I have reviewed the terms of the Servicing Agreement and I have made, or have caused to be made under my supervision, a detailed review of the transactions and conditions of the Servicer and the performance of its obligations there under during the period from September 23, 2010 to December 31, 2010;






3.             To my knowledge, based on the review described in paragraph 2, the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Servicing Agreement, during the period from September 23, 2010 to December 31, 2010, except as set forth below.







Described below are the exceptions, if any, to paragraph 3 by listing, in detail, the nature of the condition or event, the period during which it has existed and the action which the Servicer has taken, is taking, or proposes to take with respect to each such condition or event:  NONE






IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have affixed hereunto set my hand this 28th day of March, 2011.





By:          BMW Financial Services NA, LLC





By:          /s/ Martin Stremplat


Martin Stremplat




Title:       Chief Financial Officer
(Reap. Dec. 8821)

#### Bemo Shipping Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. 884947, etc.

(Decided June 5, 1957)

*John D. Rode*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant

La whence, Judge:

The proper dutiable value of certain electrical articles covered by the appeals for a reappraisement enumerated in schedule *“A,”*attached to and made part of the decision herein, is before the court for determination.

The parties hereto have stipulated and agreed that, at the time of exportation of the involved merchandise, there was no foreign, export, or United States value for such or similar merchandise; that cost of production is the proper basis of appraisement; and that said cost of production is represented by the invoice unit value, less nondutiable charges deducted on entry by the importer, less 19% per centum, plus 17% per centum.

Upon the agreed facts of record, I find and hold that cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402 (f) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (f)), is the proper basis of value for the electrical articles in issue and that said value is the invoice unit value, less the nondutiable charges deducted on entry by the importer, less 19% per centum, plus 17% per centum.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
[Cite as State ex rel. Wilson v. McGee, 123 Ohio St.3d 341, 2009-Ohio-5261.] 

THE STATE EX REL. WILSON, APPELLANT, v. MCGEE, JUDGE, APPELLEE. 

[Cite as State ex rel. Wilson v. McGee, 123 Ohio St.3d 341, 2009-Ohio-5261.] 

Mandamus — Writ sought by criminal defendant to correct his sentence — Trial 

court was authorized to correct its clerical error in mistakenly 

characterizing the degree of the offense of which the defendant was 

convicted — Court of appeals’ denial of writ affirmed. 

(No. 2009-1038 — Submitted September 30, 2009 — Decided October 8, 2009.) 

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Montgomery County, No. CA 23333. 

__________________ 

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the 

petition of appellant, Lawrence E. Wilson, for a writ of mandamus to correct his 

sentence. The common pleas court was authorized under Crim.R. 36 to correct its 

clerical error in mistakenly characterizing the degree of the offense of which 

Wilson was convicted. See State ex rel. Cruzado v. Zaleski, 111 Ohio St.3d 353, 

2006-Ohio-5795, 856 N.E.2d 263, ¶ 19. Moreover, Wilson had an adequate 

remedy by appeal to raise his claim of noncompliance with Crim.R. 32. Id. at ¶ 

32. Finally, Wilson waived this claim on appeal by failing to raise it in his 

petition in the court of appeals and by not seeking to amend his petition. See 

State ex rel. R.W. Sidley, Inc. v. Crawford, 100 Ohio St.3d 113, 2003-Ohio-5101, 

796 N.E.2d 929, ¶ 32. 

Judgment affirmed. 

 MOYER, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR,

O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 

__________________ 

 Lawrence E. Wilson, pro se. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

2 

 Mathias H. Heck Jr., Montgomery County Prosecuting Attorney, and John 

A. Cumming, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 

______________________
No. 64316.

protest 60/1595 (New York).

#### Frederik Lunning, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of vases in mineral colors similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 62694, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.