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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
September 30, 1996 10-QSB financial statements and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                      12,344,548
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             2,140,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 49,861,285
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       4,392,891
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                         4,408,716
<LOANS>                                    130,917,317
<ALLOWANCE>                                  1,446,016
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             210,982,153
<DEPOSITS>                                 192,829,298
<SHORT-TERM>                                 1,163,074
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,432,728
<LONG-TERM>                                    200,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,024,437
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,332,616
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              15,357,053
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              9,382,997
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            1,993,323
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               286,883
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            11,663,203
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           5,231,523
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,434,484
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        6,228,719
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  280,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              27,962
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              5,339,196
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,077,585
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   2,077,585
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,299,016
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.84
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.84
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.87
<LOANS-NON>                                    597,182
<LOANS-PAST>                                   415,257
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                             1,156,030
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             1,335,275
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  195,468
<RECOVERIES>                                    26,209
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            1,446,016
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         1,446,016
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

Before 

KING, GASTON, and FOIL, 

Appellate Military Judges

_________________________

UNITED STATES

Appellee

v.

Timothy D. JOSHUA

Aviation Boatswain’s Mate Fuel Handler Third Class

(E-4), U.S. Navy

Appellant

No. 201900222

Decided: 9 January 2020.

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary.

Military Judge: Captain Michael J. Luken, JAGC, USN. Sentence adjudged 22 April 2019 by a special court-martial convened at Naval 

Station Norfolk, Virginia, consisting of a military judge sitting alone.

Sentence in the Entry of Judgment: a bad-conduct discharge.

For Appellant: Captain Jeremiah J. Sullivan III, JAGC, USN.

For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.

_________________________

This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under 

NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2(a).

_________________________

PER CURIAM:

After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of 

error, we have determined that the findings and sentence are correct in law 

and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to the appellant’s substantial rights occurred. Articles 59 and 66, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866.
United States v. Joshua, NMCCA No. 201900222

2

The findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT:

RODGER A. DREW, JR.

Clerk of Court
# C_2010051EN.01002702.xml

| 27.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/27

---

Order of the President of the Court of 17 November 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Cyprus

(Case C-466/08) (1)

1

2010/C 51/44

Language of the case: Greek

Language of the case: Greek

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 327, 20.12.2008.

1

---
# C_2009180EN.01001301.xml

| 1.8.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 180/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 June 2009 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Administratīvā apgabaltiesa — Republic of Latvia) — Schenker SIA v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

(Case C-16/08) (1)

1

(Common Customs Tariff - Tariff classification - Combined Nomenclature - Active matrix liquid crystal devices)

2009/C 180/21

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Referring court

Administratīvā apgabaltiesa

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Schenker SIA

Applicant:

Defendant: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Administratīvā apgabaltiesa — Interpretation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1) — Active matrix liquid crystal device (LCD) — Classification in heading 8528 21 90 or 9013 80 20 of the Combined Nomenclature — Whether an article has or not the essential characteristics of a complete or finished product.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Subheading 8528 21 90 of the Combined Nomenclature constituting Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1789/2003 of 11 September 2003, must be interpreted as not applying, as at 29 December 2004, to active matrix liquid crystal devices (LCD) principally made up of the following elements:

| — | two glass plates; |
| --- | --- |

—

two glass plates;

| — | a layer of liquid crystal inserted between the two plates; |
| --- | --- |

—

a layer of liquid crystal inserted between the two plates;

| — | vertical and horizontal signal drivers; |
| --- | --- |

—

vertical and horizontal signal drivers;

| — | backlight; |
| --- | --- |

—

backlight;

| — | inverter providing high-voltage power for backlight; |
| --- | --- |

—

inverter providing high-voltage power for backlight;

and

| — | control block — data transmission interface (control PCB or PWB) to ensure sequential transmission of data to each pixel (dot) of the LCD unit using specific technology — LVDS (low-voltage differential signalling). |
| --- | --- |

—

control block — data transmission interface (control PCB or PWB) to ensure sequential transmission of data to each pixel (dot) of the LCD unit using specific technology — LVDS (low-voltage differential signalling).

---

(1)  OJ C 92, 12.4.2008.

1

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 26, 2011 

h0919 

Order 

 

September 26, 2011 

143188

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 143188 

 COA: 303293 

DESHAWN ANTONIO FOSTER, Kent CC: 09-004049-FC 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 27, 2011 order 

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.
# C_2021217EN.01001301.xml

| 7.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 15 April 2021 — FV v Council of the European Union

(Case C-875/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Application for annulment - Civil service - Staff report - Assessment criteria - Consistency of output - Delays - Submission of a medical certificate - Duty of care)

(2021/C 217/17)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: FV (represented by: É. Boigelot, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders FV to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders FV to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ C 77, 9.3.2020.

---
# C_2009282EN.01001201.xml

| 21.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 October 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Klagenfurt (Austria)) — SPÖ Landesorganisation Kärnten v Finanzamt Klagenfurt

(Case C-267/08) (1)

1

(VAT - Entitlement to deduct input tax - Concept of ‘economic activities’ - Regional groups of a political party - Advertising activities benefiting the party’s local groups - Expenditure relating to those activities exceeding income)

2009/C 282/21

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Klagenfurt

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SPÖ Landesorganisation Kärnten

Applicant:

Defendant: Finanzamt Klagenfurt

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Unabhängiger Finanzsenat, Außenstelle Klagenfurt (Austria) — Interpretation of Article 4(1) and (2) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — Concept of ‘economic activity’ — Organisation by the provincial organisation of a political party of promotional activities for the benefit of the district organisations of that party, taking the form of events, the production and delivery of publicity material and the organisation of an annual ball — Expenses related to these activities considerably exceeding the revenue derived from passing on the expense of some of those activities to the district organisations and from the sale of the tickets for the ball

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4(1) and (2) of the Sixth Council Directive (77/388/EEC) of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment is to be interpreted as meaning that, external advertising activities carried out by a section of a Member State’s political party is not to be regarded as an economic activity.

---

(1)  OJ C 247, 27.9.2008.

1

---
## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02 - 12 - 00103 - CV
$5,990.00 IN U.S. CU RRENCY; AND 1999 MERCURY APPELLANT S

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS APPELLEE

---------- FROM THE 372ND DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

---------- 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

---------- Bobby Glen Turner, Jr. attempts to appeal from an “Interlocutory Nihil Dicit Judgment” that was signed on February 27, 2012. On March 16, 2012, we
i nformed the parties of our concern that we might not have jurisdiction over this
appe al because the “Interlocutory Nihil Dicit Judgment” did not appear to be a final judgment or an appealable interlocutory order and that the appeal could be

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2

dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response on or before March 26 , 201 2 , showing grounds for continuing the appeal. We received no response. Because the “Interlocutory Nihil Dicit Judgment” signed by the trial court on February 27, 2012 , do es not constitute an appealable interlocutory order, we d ismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f); Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014 (West Supp. 2008) (setting forth appealable interlocutory orders ). But see Fid. & Cas. Co. of NY v. Vogel , No. B14

- 88

- 00005

- CV, 19 88 WL 83827, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 11, 1988, writ denied) (reaching merits of appeal from an interlocutory nihil dicit judgment because trial court had granted a motion for severance of the judgment on the cross

- action , enabling Fideli ty to pursue its appeal).

PER CURIAM
PANEL: WALKER, MCCOY, and MEIER, JJ.
DELIVERED: May 3, 2012
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Alfredo Torres, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Kuffner, J.), rendered February 7, 1990, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of those branches of the defendant’s omnibus motion which were to suppress statements made by him and physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The evidence adduced at the suppression hearing established that the arresting officer’s decision to pull over the defendant’s motorcycle was premised upon his reasonable belief that the motorcycle was being operated without a rear license plate in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 402 (1). Moreover, the arresting officer’s testimony was neither incredible as a matter of law nor supportive of the defendant’s present contention that the stop was employed as a pretext to investigate unrelated criminal activity *(see, People v Ricciardi,*149 AD2d 742; *see also, People v Francois,*155 AD2d 685, 686; *cf, People v Llopis,*125 AD2d 416).

Finally, the defendant’s sentence was not excessive *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80). Bracken, J. R, Hooper, Miller and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT
GEORGE L. BREWSTER, 

### JR., ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D19-859 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Respondent. ) ) Opinion filed November 6, 2019. Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Katherine G. Essrig Judge. Julianne M. Holt of Law Office of Julianne M. Holt, Tampa, for Petitioner. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Cynthia Richards, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Dismissed.
LaROSE, MORRIS, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Leonard A. Shelton, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Wexner, J.), rendered May 1, 1989, convicting him of rape in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the evidence adduced at trial was legally insufficient to sustain a verdict of guilt in that the People failed to prove every element of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt. However, as the defendant did not *888state his objection with specificity in his application for a trial order of dismissal, the issue is unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Bynum,*70 NY2d 858). In any event, viewing the evidence adduced at trial in a light most favorable to the People *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620) we find that it was legally sufficient to support the conviction.

The complainant’s testimony that the defendant climbed into bed with her, held a knife at her throat, forcibly removed her clothing and forcibly engaged in sexual intercourse with her established that the defendant forcibly raped her. This evidence similarly established the defendant’s guilt of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80). Eiber, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.
#### Application of John E. BURKE for Writ of Habeas Corpus.

No. A-12727.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

April 15, 1959.

John E. Burke, pro se.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Sam H. Lattimore, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

BRETT, Judge.

 This is an original proceeding for writ of habeas corpus brought by John E. Burke, pro se, wherein he alleges he is illegally restrained of his liberty by the Warden of the Oklahoma State Penitentiary, by virtue of a judgment and sentence of the District Court of Haskell County, Oklahoma, of twenty five years upon his conviction by a jury on a charge of robbery in the first degree. He alleges the judgment and sentence to be void for identically the same reasons previously presented to this Court on a petition for writ of habeas corpus. In re Burke, Okl.Cr., 324 P.2d 285.

In Ex parte Mayfield, Okl.Cr., 322 P.2d 1073, 1074, it was held:

> “This court is consistent in the rule that it will not entertain subsequent writs upon the same grounds and facts as related in prior application. Ex parte Davis, 74 Okl.Cr. 75, 123 P.2d 300; Ex parte Peaker, 87 Okl.Cr. 139, 194 P.2d 893.”

As above stated, the contentions herein presented being the same as this same petitioner has previously presented for our determination, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is accordingly dismissed.

POWELL, P. J., and NIX, J., concur.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-16-00719-CV

IN RE Muriel GILFORD

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 23, 2016

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On November 1, 2016, Relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. The court has 

considered Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of the opinion that Relator is not entitled 

to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2015-PA-02672, styled In the Interest of M.I.G., a Child, pending in the 

166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Karen H. Pozza presiding.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 88209]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27995]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12288]


Designation of Mohamed Ali Nkalubo and Ahmed Mahamud Hassan 
Aliyani as Specially Designated Global Terrorists

    Acting under the authority of and in accordance with section 
1(a)(ii)(B) of Executive Order 13224, as amended (``E.O. 13224'' or 
``Order''), I hereby determine that the persons known as Mohamed Ali 
Nkalubo (also known as Meddie Nkalubo and Meddie Lee) and Ahmed Mahamud 
Hassan Aliyani (also known as Ahmed Mahmoud Hassan and Ahmad Mahmoud 
Hassan) are leaders of ISIS-DRC, an entity whose property and interests 
in property are currently blocked pursuant to a determination by the 
Secretary of State pursuant to E.O. 13224.
    Consistent with the determination in section 10 of E.O. 13224 that 
prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the Order who might 
have a constitutional presence in the United States would render 
ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in the Order 
because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously, I determine 
that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person subject to this 
determination who might have a constitutional presence in the United 
States, because to do so would render ineffectual the measures 
authorized in the Order.
    This notice shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: December 6, 2023.
Antony J. Blinken,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2023-27995 Filed 12-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-AD-P
# C_2020279EN.01001202.xml

| 24.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 279/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 279/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 2 July 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wien — Austria) — IE v Magistrat der Stadt Wien

(Case C-477/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora - Directive 92/43/EEC - Article 12(1) - System of strict protection for animal species - Annex IV - Cricetus cricetus (European hamster) - Resting places and breeding sites - Deterioration or destruction - Areas which have been abandoned)

(2020/C 279/17)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Wien

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: IE

Defendant: Magistrat der Stadt Wien

Operative part of the judgment

Article 12(1)(d) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora must be interpreted as meaning that the term ‘resting places’ referred to in that provision also includes resting places which are no longer occupied by one of the protected animal species listed in Annex IV(a) to that directive, such as the Cricetus cricetus (European hamster), where there is a sufficiently high probability that that species will return to such places, which is a matter for the referring court to determine.

---

(1)  OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.

---