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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SEC FORM
10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                    1,000



<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               May-01-1999
<CASH>                                           1,652
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  181,972
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (3,943)
<INVENTORY>                                    222,016
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               518,787
<PP&E>                                         275,950
<DEPRECIATION>                                (146,792)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 685,412
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          250,260
<BONDS>                                        193,219
<COMMON>                                        47,723
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     272,285
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   685,412
<SALES>                                        188,911
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               188,911
<CGS>                                          159,050
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  159,050
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                26,747
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,451
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,114
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,153
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,961
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,120
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .08








</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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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. 01-50203 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus CLAUDIO ENRIQUEZ-VILLA, also known as Claudio Enriquez, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-00-CR-952-ALL-H

-------------------- August 23, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Claudio Enriquez-Villa appeals the 46-month term of imprisonment imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Enriquez-Villa argues that his sentence should not have exceeded the two-year maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Enriquez-Villa acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), butNo. 01-50203 -2- seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in light of the decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres

. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 121 S. Ct. 1214 (2001). EnriquezVilla’s argument is foreclosed. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that the judgment of the district court be affirmed and that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8312

CHRISTOPHER GALE, Petitioner - Appellant,

v. WARDEN OF PERRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent – Appellee,

and

JON OZMINT, Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (9:07-cv-02850-PMD)

Submitted: February 19, 2009 Decided: February 26, 2009

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher Gale, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.PER CURIAM: Christopher Gale seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “‘mandatory and jurisdictional.’” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of

Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v.

Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). Accord Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205, ___, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 2363-66 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on September 2, 2008. The notice of appeal was filed, at the earliest, on October 8, 2008. * Because Gale failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We deny Gale leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and we dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented

* See Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).

23 in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Hennion & Walsh, Inc. S-6/A


Exhibit 4.1



 


THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON


NEW YORK’S FIRST BANK-FOUNDED 1784 BY ALEXANDER HAMILTON


 


 


240 Greenwich
Street, 22W Floor, New York, NY 10286


 


 


 


September 14, 2021


 


Hennion & Walsh, Inc.


2001 Route 46, Waterview Plaza


Parsippany, New Jersey 07054


 


SmartTrust 534 (the “Fund”)


 


Dear Sirs:


The Bank of New York Mellon
is acting as trustee for the Fund, consisting of the unit investment trust (the “Trust”) included in the Registration
Statement relating to the Fund. We enclosed a list of the securities to be deposited in the Trust on the date hereof. The prices indicated
therein reflect our evaluation of such securities as of close of business on September 13, 2021, in accordance with the valuation method
set forth in the applicable Standard Terms and Conditions of Trust and Trust Agreement. We consent to the reference to The Bank of New
York Mellon as the party performing the evaluations of the Trust securities in the Registration Statement (No. 333-257109) filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission with respect to the registration of the sale of the Units of the Trust and to the filing of this
consent as an exhibit thereto.


 


Very truly yours,


 


/s/ GERARDO CIPRIANO                    


Gerardo Cipriano


Vice President
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.3 PO Box 84013Columbus GA 31908-4013Tel. 800.784.5566(GREENPOINT MORTGAGE LOGO)
 To : RWT Holdings, Inc. Re: Annual Statement as to Compliance by the Seller Pursuant to Section 6.04 of the Mortgage Loan Flow Purchase, Sale, and
Servicing Agreement between Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc. as Seller (the
Seller) and RWT Holdings, Inc. as Purchaser, dated as of August 1, 2002
(the Agreement), the undersigned officer of the Seller, hereby certifies as
to the following: (i) a review of the activities of the Seller during the calendar
year ended December 31, 2003 (the Applicable Period) and of the
Sellers performance under the Agreement has bean made under the direct
supervision of the undersigned officer; and (ii) to the best knowledge of the undersigned officer, based on
such review, the Seller has fulfilled all of its obligations under the
Agreement throughout the Applicable Period, and there has been no known
default in the fulfillment of the Sellers obligations throughout such
Applicable Period. Very Truly YoursGREENPOINT MORTGAGE
FUNDING, INC.As Seller/s/ Roy BriggsRoy BriggsTitle: Vice President
 [SPANISH LANGUAGE] 2300 Brookstone Centre Pkwy Columbus GA 31904
Customer Service Hours: Monday  Friday, 8:30 AM  8:00 PM, Eastern www.greenpointservice.com
#### BUMGUARDNER v. STATE.

No. 25048.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 20, 1950.

On Rehearing March 14, 1951.

*309None on appeal for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of a violation of the liquor laws, in McCulloch County, and under an allegation of a prior conviction of like character, he was given a penalty of $500.00.

We find only one bill of exception in the record, which relates to the overruling of a motion to quash the indictment on the general ground -that same does not charge an offense under the law. To this we do not agree.

• We do find a statement of facts herein, and the facts support a judgment, as well as a former conviction of like, character.

The judgment will therefore be.affirmed.

On Motion for Rehearing

GRAVES, Presiding Judge.

On the original submission of this cause no brief was filed. It appears from the transcript that in the, court below the motion for a new trial was overruled on May 22, 1948, but that this case was not filed in this court until September 11, 1950, and no reason is given for this late transmission to this court.

There is one bill of exception in the record which is so vague and indefinite that it is not clear therein what objection, if any, was leveled at the information herein.

On this motion -for a rehearing, our attention is called for the first time to the fact that both the information and the complaint were filed on the same day that the alleged offense was committed. It is further shown that the information neither alleges nor shows that such offense was committed anterior to the filing thereof as required by Art. 414, Sec. 6, Vernon’s Ann.Tex. C.C.P. See Martini v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 205 S.W.2d 988.

This defect in the information renders the same void and cannot be supplied by reference to the complaint. See Hoot v. State, 149 Tex.Cr.R. 316, 194 S.W.2d 97; Kennedy y. State, 22 Tex.Cr. 693, 3 S.W. 480, and cases there cited.

.The motion for a rehearing is granted, the judgijient heretofore entered is set aside,, and this cause is now.reversed and remanded.
Figure b

Page 1 of 8

FIGURE b

Photographs of Benthic Infaunal Invertebrate Samples Collected during the Fall 2010 Jacksonville Survey; Stations N01–

N04 and N06–N09

JAX-Fa10-N01-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N01-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N01-INF-C

JAX-Fa10-N01-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N01-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N01-INF-C
Figure b

Page 2 of 8

FIGURE b (continued)

Photographs of Benthic Infaunal Invertebrate Samples Collected during the Fall 2010 Jacksonville Survey; Stations N01–

N04 and N06–N09

JAX-Fa10-N02-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N02-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N02-INF-C

JAX-Fa10-N02-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N02-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N02-INF-C
Figure b

Page 3 of 8

FIGURE b (continued)

Photographs of Benthic Infaunal Invertebrate Samples Collected during the Fall 2010 Jacksonville Survey; Stations N01–

N04 and N06–N09

JAX-Fa10-N03-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N03-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N03-INF-C

JAX-Fa10-N03-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N03-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N03-INF-C
Figure b

Page 4 of 8

FIGURE b (continued)

Photographs of Benthic Infaunal Invertebrate Samples Collected during the Fall 2010 Jacksonville Survey; Stations N01–

N04 and N06–N09

JAX-Fa10-N04-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N04-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N04-INF-C

JAX-Fa10-N04-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N04-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N04-INF-C
Figure b

Page 5 of 8

FIGURE b (continued)

Photographs of Benthic Infaunal Invertebrate Samples Collected during the Fall 2010 Jacksonville Survey; Stations N01–

N04 and N06–N09

JAX-Fa10-N06-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N06-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N06-INF-C

JAX-Fa10-N06-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N06-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N06-INF-C
Figure b

Page 6 of 8

FIGURE b (continued)

Photographs of Benthic Infaunal Invertebrate Samples Collected during the Fall 2010 Jacksonville Survey; Stations N01–

N04 and N06–N09

JAX-Fa10-N07-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N07-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N07-INF-C

JAX-Fa10-N07-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N07-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N07-INF-C
Figure b

Page 7 of 8

FIGURE b (continued)

Photographs of Benthic Infaunal Invertebrate Samples Collected during the Fall 2010 Jacksonville Survey; Stations N01–

N04 and N06–N09

JAX-Fa10-N08-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N08-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N08-INF-C

JAX-Fa10-N08-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N08-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N08-INF-C
Figure b

Page 8 of 8

FIGURE b (continued)

Photographs of Benthic Infaunal Invertebrate Samples Collected during the Fall 2010 Jacksonville Survey; Stations N01–

N04 and N06–N09

JAX-Fa10-N09-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N09-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N09-INF-C

JAX-Fa10-N09-INF-A JAX-Fa10-N09-INF-B JAX-Fa10-N09-INF-C
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 25 (Monday, February 7, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 5863]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2651]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP93-187-016]


Equitrans, L.P.; Notice of Reconciliation Report

February 1, 2000.
    Take notice that on January 28, 2000, Equitrans, L.P. (Equitrans) 
hereby submits the Reconciliation Report pursuant to Article II, 
Section 1 of the Stipulation and Agreement (Settlement) filed on July 
31, 1995 in the above reference dockets, approved by the Commission on 
September 28, 1995.
    Equitrans states that the purpose of this filing is to report the 
actual costs expended by Equitrans during the four-year surcharge 
period for well plugging and abandonment. The report shows by well 
number each of the wells plugged and abandoned, the date of the 
plugging and abandonment, current net book value of the wells of 
Equitrans' books, and the amounts incurred for such plugging and 
abandonment. Equitrans states that it will file a refund report with a 
true-up within thirty days of filing this reconciliation report.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed on 
or before February 8, 2000. Protests will be considered by the 
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will 
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Copies of 
this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be 
viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-
208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-2651 Filed 2-04-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 13.2



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
Annual Report of Randgold Resources Limited (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2015 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Graham P. Shuttleworth, 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 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|/s/ Graham P. Shuttleworth | 
|-------------------------- | 
|Graham P. Shuttleworth     | 
|Chief Financial Officer    | 
|March 31, 2016             |
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 198 (Thursday, October 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60691]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26401]


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

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

October 5, 2000.

TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m., Thursday, October 12, 2000.

PLACE: Room 6005, 6th Floor, 1730 K Street, NW., Washington, DC.

STATUS: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Commission will consider and act upon the 
following:
    1. Consolidation Coal Co., Docket No. WEVA 98-37 (Issues include 
whether, based on visible observations, the operator failed to disperse 
and carry away drill dust from the breathing zones of roof bolters, 
thereby violating 30 C.F.R. Sec. 72.630(d)).
    Any person attending an open meeting who requires special 
accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 
interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. 
Subject to 29 C.F.R. Secs. 2706.150(a)(3) and 2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean Ellen (202) 653-5629/(202) 
708-9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

Jean H. Ellen,
Chief Docket Clerk.
[FR Doc. 00-26401 Filed 10-10-00; 3:41 pm]
BILLING CODE 6735-01-M
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk November 22, 2010

s1115 

# Order

November 22, 2010

141243

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 141243 COA: 297225 Calhoun CC: 2 005-003383-FH ALARIC ARNOLD FAIRCHILD, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appe al the April 29, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has
failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
Exhibit 35.1

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

Chase Bank USA, National Association

Chase Issuance Trust

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Chase Bank USA, National Association (the Bank), as Servicer, pursuant to the Fourth Amended and Restated Transfer and Servicing Agreement, dated
as of January 20, 2016 (as amended and supplemented from time to time, the Agreement) among the Bank, as administrator, account owner and servicer (in such capacity, the Servicer), Chase Card Funding LLC, as transferor,
Chase Issuance Trust and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as indenture trustee and collateral agent, does hereby certify that:



| | 1. | The Bank is, as of the date hereof, the Servicer under the Agreement.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | A review of the Servicers activities during the calendar year ended December 31, 2016 (the Reporting Period) and of its performance under the
Agreement has been made under my supervision.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 3. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the
Reporting Period.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this certificate this 30thday of March 2017.



CHASE BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as ServicerBy:

/s/ Todd S. LehnerName:

Todd S. LehnerTitle:

Managing Director
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC d/b/a 

BRAZOS LICENSING AND 

DEVELOPMENT,

Plaintiff,

 v. 

ZTE CORPORATION; ZTE (USA), INC.; 

AND ZTE (TX), INC., 

Defendant. 

§

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-CV-00497-ADA

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND RESPONSE 

BRIEF DEADLINES TO MOTIONS TO DISMISS

Plaintiff WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a Brazos Licensing and Development (“WSOU”) 

files this unopposed motion to extend the deadline to file a response to Motions to Dismiss11 filed 

by defendants ZTE Corporation; ZTE (USA), Inc.; and ZTE (TX), Inc. (“Defendants”), and would 

show as follows: 

1. On October 9, 2020, Defendants filed Motions to Dismiss, respectively, at Dkt. 

Nos. 23, 24, 25 (corrected by Dkt. 26). 

2. Pursuant to the Local Rules, WSOU’s deadline to file responses to the Motions is 

October 24, 2020. WSOU requests a three-week extension of its deadlines to November 6, 2020. 

3. This is the first extension WSOU has requested. The requested extension should 

cause no delay in the schedule.

4. WSOU has consulted with counsel for Defendants, and Defendants have indicated 

that they do not oppose this extension request. 

11 The motions were additionally styled with an alternative relief to transfer. For simplification, 

the motions will be styled herein as Motions to Dismiss. 

Case 6:20-cv-00497-ADA Document 27 Filed 10/13/20 Page 1 of 2
WHEREFORE, WSOU respectfully requests that the deadline to file a respond to 

Defendant’s Motions, Dkt. Nos. 23, 24, 25 (corrected by Dkt. 26) be extended to November 6, 

2020. 

Dated: October 13, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Ryan S. Loveless

 James L. Etheridge

 Texas Bar No. 24059147 

Ryan S. Loveless 

Texas Bar No. 24036997 

Brett A. Mangrum 

Texas Bar No. 24065671 

Travis L. Richins 

Texas Bar No. 24061296 

Jeff Huang

Etheridge Law Group, PLLC 

2600 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 120 / 324 

Southlake, TX 76092 

Tel.: (817) 470-7249 

Fax: (817) 887-5950 

Jim@EtheridgeLaw.com 

Ryan@EtheridgeLaw.com 

Brett@EtheridgeLaw.com 

Travis@EtheridgeLaw.com 

Jeff@EtheridgeLaw.com

ATTORNEYS FOR WSOU

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that all counsel of record, who are deemed to have consented to electronic 

service are being served this October 13, 2020, with a copy of this document via email.

/s/ Ryan S. Loveless

Ryan S. Loveless 

Case 6:20-cv-00497-ADA Document 27 Filed 10/13/20 Page 2 of 2