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

<ARTICLE> 9
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           5,633
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 4,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     46,649
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        104,653
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,971
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 160,106
<DEPOSITS>                                     127,719
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,566
<LONG-TERM>                                      9,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,209
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,112
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 160,106
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  7,039
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                2,220
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   209
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 9,468
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               4,737
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,755
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            4,713
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 (2)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  3,383
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,042
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,042
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,950
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .89
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .88
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.14
<LOANS-NON>                                        857
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    134
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,034
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      449
<RECOVERIES>                                       386
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,971
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,991
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            980


</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-50793 Summary Calendar

GILBERTO RODRIGUEZ,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-96-CV-1058

- - - - - - - - - - August 28, 1998

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Gilberto Rodriguez appeals from a judgment affirm i ng the

decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Rodriguez’s

claim for disability insurance be nefits. He argues that the

administrative law judge (ALJ) did not consider all of Rodriguez’s

impairmen ts or their combined effect and that the ALJ’s decision

was not supported by substantial evidence in the record. He

further argues that the ALJ erred in relying on the medicalvocational guidelines without eliciting testimony from theNo. 97-50793 -2-

vocational expert present at the hearing.

Our review of the record reveals that the ALJ considered all

o f Rodriguez’s impairments, including their combined effect, and

that the ALJ’s determination that Rodriguez could perform sedentary

work was supported by substantial evidence. S ee Legget v. Chater

,
67 F.3d 558, 564 (5th Cir. 1995). Rodriguez’s ability to perform

sedentary work, his age, his educati on, and his work experience

matched the criteria set forth in the medical -vocational

guidelines, see 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P., App. 2, Table 1, Rule

201.19, and the ALJ did not err i n relying on the guidelines

without consideration of the vocational expert. S ee Scott v.

Shalala , 30 F.3d 33, 34 (5th Cir. 1994).

AFFIRMED.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

YINGJI JIN,

 Petitioner,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 13-71909

Agency No. A099-443-683

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 9, 2015** 

Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

Yingji Jin, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of

Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s

(“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum and withholding of removal. 

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence

FILED

DEC 15 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
the agency’s factual findings, Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079, 1083 (9th Cir. 2011),

and de novo due process claims, Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1011 (9th Cir.

2010). We deny the petition for review. 

With respect to asylum and withholding of removal, substantial evidence

supports the agency’s determination that Jin failed to carry her burden of proving

eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal. The agency did not err in

concluding that Jin failed to corroborate her testimony with reasonably obtainable

evidence. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4) (“No court shall reverse a determination

made by a trier of fact with respect to the availability of corroborating evidence . . .

unless the court finds . . . that a reasonable trier of fact is compelled to conclude

that such corroborating evidence is unavailable.”); Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040,

1044-45 (9th Cir. 2009) (IJ may require reasonably obtainable corroboration). The

record does not support Jin’s due process contention that the IJ did not provide her

an opportunity to explain the lack of evidence. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241,

1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error to prevail on a due process claim). Finally,

the letters Jin submitted along with the rest of the evidence in the record does not

compel the conclusion that Jin met her burden of proof. See Ren v. Holder, 

2 13-71909
648 F.3d 1079, 1094 (9th Cir. 2011). Thus, Jin’s asylum and withholding of

removal claims fail. See id. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

3 13-71909
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**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 Form 10-Qof Redpoint Bio Corporation (the “Company”) for the period ended March 31,2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), the undersigned, Scott M. Horvitz, Chief Financial andOperating Officer and Treasurer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 
| Dated: May 14, 2009 | /s/ Scott M.  Horvitz                                                    |
|--------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                     | Scott M Horvitz                                                          |
|                     | Chief Financial and Operating Officer  and Treasurer |
|                     | (Principal Financial  and Accounting Officer)                            |

 

----

*                          A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to Redpoint Bio Corporation andwill be retained by Redpoint Bio Corporation and furnished to the Securitiesand Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000850625
<NAME> CHRISKEN GROWTH & INCOME L.P. II

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         209,938
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               361,520
<PP&E>                                       5,601,196
<DEPRECIATION>                                 435,783
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,526,933
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          165,118
<BONDS>                                      4,618,965
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     742,850
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,526,933
<SALES>                                      1,286,902
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,381,565
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  873,784
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             270,630
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                237,151
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   237,151
<EPS-BASIC>                                      18.53
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    18.53


</TABLE>
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-18-0000575

08-AUG-2018

10:00 AM
#### Indian River State Bank, a Corporation, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. Sun Mutual Insurance Company, *Defendant in Error.*

This case was decided by Division A.

Writ of error to the Circuit Court for Brevard County.

*Geo. M. Robbins*and *Geo. P. Raney*for plaintiff in error.

*A. W. Cockrell & Son*for defendant in error.

Per Curiam.

The above stated cause coming on for final disposition before Division A of the court upon the transcript of record and briefs and arguments of counsel for the respective parties, after due consideration the court finds that the case made in the transcript of record is substantially the same in all material particulars as that of the Indian River State Bank as plaintiff in error against the Hartford Fire Insurance Company, as defendant in error decided by written opinion by Division A of the court at the present term, in which substantially the same questions were presented as are involved in the present case, and that what is said in that case is fully decisive of the questions presented in this case. It is, therefore, hereby considered, ordered and adjudged that the judgment of the Circuit Court in this cause be, and the same is hereby reversed with directions to overrule the demurrer of the defendant insurance company to the last amended declaration of the plaintiff below, the Indian River State Bank, and to sustain the demurrer of the said plaintiff to the pleas of the defendant in all such particulars wherein such pleas may be inconsistent with the views expressed in the said opinion of this court in the said case of the *Indian River State Bank v. The Hartford Fire Insurance Company*herein above referred to, and for such further proceedings as shall be consonant *343with law. The costs of this appellate proceeding to be taxed against the defendant in error.
Dir No: FAA-2015-0088 Dir ID: 2014-NM-179-AD

Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed?

Organization Person Contacted Date Response

Transport 

Canada

Gordanko Jeremic

gordanko.jeremic@tc.gc.ca

613-952-4357

08/29/2014 .Emailed. No Objection

Bombardier 

Aerospace

Mher Krikorian

Mher.Krikorian@aero.bombardier.com

09/10/2014 Emailed. No objection

Regional 

Airline 

Association

Stacey Bechdolt

bechdolt@raa.org

8/29/2014 Emailed. No objection
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determin ed that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 95-20830

Summary Calendar

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ISRAEL ESPERICUETA,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(H-95-CV-1570)

________________________________________________ April 11, 1996

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and D E MOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Israel Espericueta, p ro se

, challenges the denial of his 28

U.S.C. § 2255 motion. He asserts that he was denied the effective

assistance of counsel d uring his criminal trial because his

attorney had been suspended from the practice of law by the State

Bar of Texas for failure to comply with the minimum continuing

legal education requirements, and that the district court erred in

denying his motion without a hearing.

In United States v. Carpenter , 776 F.2d 1291, 1297 (5th Cir.

1985), pursuant to Thread v. United States

, 354 U.S. 278 (1957),2

our court held that "an attorney disbarred from a state bar

association may not be summarily disbarred from practicing before

a federal court even when that state bar membership was the

predicate upon which the lawyer was admitted to the federal court".

Moreover, United States v. McKinney , 53 F.3d 664, 675 (5th Cir.),

cert. denied

, 116 S. Ct. 261 (1995), notes that "[t]he local rules

for the courts of the Northern District of Texas provide that in a

case where a lawyer loses the right to practice in his home state

because of failure to meet CLE requirements, any suspension in

federal court is not automatic". Likewise, under Appendix A, Rule

2 of the 1991 and 1992 Local Rule s of the United States District

Court for the Southern District of Texas, which cover the time

period at issue, an attorney disciplined by any other court is

subject to discipline in the southern district, but it is not

automatic.

Espericue ta's § 2255 was properly denied because he did not

allege that his counsel had been susp ended from practicing in

federal court, even though he had been suspended by the State Bar

of Texas. And, the district court did not err in denying the

motion withou t a hearing, because the motion and record show

conclusively that relief is not warranted. U nited St ates v.

Bartholomew

, 974 F.2d 39, 41 (5th Cir. 1992). Accordingly, the

denial of 2255 relief is

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.1

Certifications of Periodic Report by the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

As adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Avatech Solutions, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending June 30,
2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and to which this Certification is an exhibit (the Report), the undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company for the periods
reflected therein.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                         |  |  |  |                                      
|------------------------ |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|                         |  | 
|Date: September 28, 2010 |  |  |  | /s/    MARC L.
DULUDE                
|                         |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer              
|                         |  | 
|                         |  |  |  | /s/    LAWRENCE
RYCHLAK              
|                         |  |  |  | President and Chief Financial Officer
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.58 MB)

Tags:Department of Defense, DoD, DLA Troop Support, Defense Logistics Agency, DLA Troop Support Indo-Pacific

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
----

----

**Exhibit      32**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C.  SECTION 1350**

|   | (1) | the                Registrant’s Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007,                as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date                hereof                (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C 78m or 78o(d));                and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Registrant. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| */s/                Michael V. Shustek*          |
|--------------------------------------------------|
| Michael                V. Shustek                |
| Chief                Executive Officer           |
| of                Vestin Realty Mortgage I, Inc. |

| */s/                Rocio Revollo*               |
|--------------------------------------------------|
| Rocio                Revollo                     |
| Chief                Financial Officer           |
| of                Vestin Realty Mortgage I, Inc. |
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, George
A. McQuain, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Global Axcess Corp.
(the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:





(1)           the
Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009  (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m
or 78o(d)); 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:  January
27, 2011





/s/ George A. McQuainName:  George
      A. McQuainTitle:  President
      and Chief Executive
Officer