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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           89000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1437000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (28000)
<INVENTORY>                                     559000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2422000
<PP&E>                                         1811000
<DEPRECIATION>                               (1426000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2476000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1988000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         74000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3270000
<SALES>                                        3668000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               3668000
<CGS>                                          3155000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  4230000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                9000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (562000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (30000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (532000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                (532000)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.14)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


               INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-74889 on Form S-8 of our report dated February 27, 2003 (March 7, 2003 as to
Note 18) (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an
explanatory paragraph relating to the change in the Company's method of
accounting for goodwill and other intangible assets) appearing in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Championship Auto Racing Teams, Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 2002.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana
March 24, 2003
EXHIBIT
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of Pollex, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Seong Yong
Cho, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





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





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





Dated:
      April 15, 2009
            /s/ Seong
      Yong ChoBy:
      Seong Yong ChoIts:
      President





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Pollex, Inc. and will be retained by Pollex, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Attachment 5

Signed Resolution and Minute Order 

Rule 323.1 

(June 19, 2014)
<PAGE>



                                                                 EXHIBIT 4.13

                                    Schedule

                  Information on seven substantially identical
                         Assignments of Leases and Rents
                            dated as of June 20, 2001
                    to First Union National Bank as Assignee

      (Seven additional documents are identical, except as set forth below,
                    to the document included as Exhibit 4.5)



       Apartment Property                     Assignor
       ------------------                     --------

       Deerfield Apartments                   CRIT-NC IV, LLC
       Durham, North Carolina

       Meadow Creek Apartments                CRIT-NC IV, LLC
       Pineville, North Carolina

       Pinnacle Ridge Apartments              CRIT-NC IV, LLC
       Asheville, North Carolina

       Cottonwood Crossing Apartments         CAC V Limited Partnership
       Arlington, Texas

       Main Park Apartments                   CAC V Limited Partnership
       Duncanville, Texas

       Paces Cove Apartments                  CAC V Limited Partnership
       Dallas, Texas

       Wildwood Apartments                    CAC V Limited Partnership
       Eucless, Texas
IIB 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2802 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 15, 2014 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 418 Liberty Street in Covington, Indiana, 

as the ‘‘Fountain County Veterans Memorial Post Office’’. 

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


jbell on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 2802 RFS

1 SECTION 1. FOUNTAIN COUNTY VETERANS MEMORIAL 

2 POST OFFICE. 

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

4 Postal Service located at 418 Liberty Street in Covington, 

5 Indiana, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Fountain 

6 County Veterans Memorial Post Office’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

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

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Fountain County Vet11 erans Memorial Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 14, 2014. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


jbell on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*HOPETON LEE MEDLEY

*Brian S. Carlow,*senior assistant public defender, in support of the petition.

*Eileen McCarthy Geel,*deputy assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided June 25, 1998

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 48 Conn. App. 662 (AC 16456), is denied.

BERDON, J.,

dissenting. I would grant the defendant’s petition for certification to appeal.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7584

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ALANI OLUSEGUN ARAWOLE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, Chief District Judge.

(CR-97-283-L, CA-00-66-BEL)

Submitted: February 27, 2004 Decided: March 31, 2004

Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alani Olusegun Arawole, Appellant Pro Se. Angela R. White,

Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Alani Olusegun Arawole, a federal prisoner, seeks to

appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition

filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken

from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding unless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

for claims addressed by a district court absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that the

district court’s resolution of his constitutional claims is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by

the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v.

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 338 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.

473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir. 2001).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Arawole

has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we grant the

motion to file an amended informal brief, deny a certificate of

appealability, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
10QSB REPORT FOR THE QUARTER AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH 10QSB.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000095898
<NAME> SWISS CHALET , INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                       4,342,080
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  433,150
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     34,825
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,865,961
<PP&E>                                       6,578,504
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,184,673
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,387,913
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          788,750
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       700,581
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,773,482
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,387,913
<SALES>                                      4,346,399
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,714,467
<CGS>                                           76,321
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   76,321
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,965,722
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,672,514
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,672,514
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,672,514
<EPS-BASIC>                                     1.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.19


</TABLE>
SEVERANCE AGREEMENT




This Severance Agreement is made and entered into as of January 26, 2010, by and between The Steak n Shake Company (the “Company”) and Duane Geiger.  For valuable consideration as expressly acknowledged by Company and Duane Geiger, Company and Duane Geiger agree to terminate
any prior agreement concerning employment, severance or change of control and agree to a new contractual obligation; whereby, only in the event Mr. Biglari ceases to be Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, shall Mr. Geiger have the option of terminating his employment with the Company and receiving a lump sum severance payment equal to one year of his then current base compensation.









/s/ Sardar Biglari

January 26, 2010Sardar Biglari – Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Date







/s/ Duane Geiger

January 26, 2010Duane Geiger – Interim Chief Financial Officer

Date
Exhibit 32.2

                         Tel-Instrument Electronics Corp
                                CFO Certification

           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 8 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection  with the  Quarterly  Report of  Tel-Instrument  Electronics
Corp. (the "Company"),  on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2004, as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  I, Joseph P. Macaluso,  Principal Accounting Officer of the Company,
certify,  pursuant to and solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge and based on my review of the Report:

            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.

                                                By: /s/ Joseph P. Macaluso
                                                    ----------------------
                                                    Joseph P. Macaluso
                                                    Principal Accounting Officer

                                                    February 14, 2005

      A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has
been  provided  to  Tel-Instrument  Electronics  Corp  and will be  retained  by
Tel-Instrument  Electronics  Corp and furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-50892

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RICARDO RODRIGUEZ-BERBAL,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:14-CR-911-1

Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ricardo Rodriguez-Berbal challenges the substantive reasonableness of 

his within-guidelines sentence of 41 months of imprisonment for illegal 

reentry. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Where, as here, the district court imposes a 

sentence within a properly calculated guidelines range, we apply a rebuttable 

presumption of reasonableness. See United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 

(5th Cir. 2009). Although he wishes to preserve the issue of the proper 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 17, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-50892 Document: 00513763823 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/17/2016
No. 15-50892

2

standard of review, Rodriguez-Berbal correctly concedes that we will review 

his sentence only for plain error. See United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 

391-92 (5th Cir. 2007). 

As an initial matter, Rodriguez-Berbal argues that U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 

lacks an empirical basis, relies on criminal history to set offense levels, and

fails to account for the fact that he has no prior illegal reentry convictions. We 

have repeatedly rejected similar challenges. See United States v. Duarte, 569 

F.3d 528, 529 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 

357, 366-67 (5th Cir. 2009). Rodriguez-Berbal also notes that a revision of 

§ 2L1.2 is expected to take effect November 1, 2016, and that, under the 

amended guideline, his recommended sentencing range would be much lower. 

However, he has not shown that the district court relied on an incorrect version 

of the Guidelines. See United States v. Kimler, 167 F.3d 889, 893 (5th Cir. 

1999); U.S.S.G. § 1B1.11(a). 

Rodriguez-Berbal argues that his sentence is greater than necessary to 

provide deterrence and to reflect his personal history and characteristics. At 

sentencing, the district court stated that it had considered the Guidelines, the 

§ 3553(a) factors, the allocution of the parties, and the pre-sentence report. His

repetition of arguments that the district court already considered amounts to 

a disagreement with his sentence, which fails to rebut the presumption of 

reasonableness. See United States v. Ruiz, 621 F.3d 390, 398 (5th Cir. 2010); 

United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2008). 

In sum, Rodriguez-Berbal has not rebutted the presumption of 

reasonableness attached to his within-guidelines range sentence. See Cooks,

589 F.3d at 186. Therefore, he has not shown that the district court plainly 

erred. See Peltier, 505 F.3d at 391-92. 

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-50892 Document: 00513763823 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/17/2016
#### Clarence J. HANKINS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 24646.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 2, 1949.

No appearance for appellant.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was found guilty of murder with malice and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for life.

The appellant has filed proper motion to withdraw the appeal. The motion is granted and appeal is dismissed.
Faulk, Scott (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

To whom it may concern, 

Ann Ellingson <annieellingson@gmail.com> 

Monday, May 04, 2015 3:30 PM 

Faulk, Scott (OST) 

Dot- Ost -2000- 6945 

I'm writing in support of continuing the Island Air mail service contract for the Moser Bay/Olga Bay/ Alitak route on 

Kodiak Island. 

Island Air has provided excellent mail service for the south end of Kodiak, very prompt, friendly, reliable and 

professional. As a resident at the south end of Kodiak since 1983 and in Alaska since 1979 this service is invaluable. 

We appreciate a service contractor who is well established, has a float plane already, familiar with the area and able to 

transition from year to year seamlessly. 

We appreciate your thoughtful consideration when extending Island Air's mail service contract to an reputable entity. 

Sincerely, 

Rick and Ann Ellingson 

PO Box KMY 

Kodiak, AK 

99615 

Sent from my iPhone 

1
EXHIBIT 32.1



CEO CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 USC §1350, as adopted), Patrick McVeigh, Interim Chief Executive Officer of PalmSource,
Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



1.The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 3, 2005, and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and



2.The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the periods presented therein.



IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of the 17 day of August 2005.



/s/    PATRICK
MCVEIGHPatrick McVeigh Interim Chief Executive Officer




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to PalmSource, Inc. and will be retained by PalmSource, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
os UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street ‘Re” San Francisco, CA 94105 

## OCT 252011
Mr. Robert D. Fletcher Deputy Executive Officer CaliforniaAir Resources Board P.O. Box2815 Sacramento, California 95812 Dear Mr. Fletcher: On May 19, 2011, the CaliforniaAir Resources Board submittedrevisions to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). We have reviewedmaterials submittedwith the following rule and found that it fulfills the completeness criteriain40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V. APCD/AQMD Rule Rule Title # SanJoaguinValleyUnified 2201 New and Modified Stationary Source Review Rule This addresses all revisions in this submittal. In the coming months we will review the complete revisions for action pursuantto Clean AirAct section 110(k). Questions regarding our completeness review shouldbe directed to Cynthia G. Allen at (415) 947-4120. Sincerely,

\ 

## cu Jordan Director, Air Division

cc: Mr. Seyed Sadredin, APCO San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Mr. Michael Guzzetta, Manager Rule Evaluation Section Stationary Source Division
Consent of Independent Auditor

We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  Registration  Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 333-95437 and 333-50850)  pertaining to the Frisby  Technologies,
Inc.  1998 Stock Option Plan and the Frisby  Technologies,  Inc.  2000  Employee
Stock Purchase Plan, respectively, of our report dated February 28, 2001, except
for Note 6 and Note 9, for which the date is March 27, 2001, with respect to the
consolidated  financial statements of Frisby Technologies,  Inc. included in the
Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the year ended December 31, 2000.

                                             /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Winston-Salem, North Carolina
March 29, 2001
#### NALLS v. STATE.

No. 24490.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 19, 1949.

No attorney for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Unlawfully permitting the operation of a slot machine in a public place is the offense; the punishment, a fine of one hundred dollars.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. Nothing . is presented for the consideration of this Court.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed:

Opinion approved by the Court.
#### CRISP v. STATE.

No. 22211.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 17, 1942.

A. J. Smith, Jr., of Stamford, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted for the offense of burglary, and his punishment assessed at two years confinement in the penitentiary.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exceptions. Appellant' entered a plea of guilty to' the offense charged and waived a jury upon the trial. The indictment and all other matters of procedure appear to be in regular form.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
##### 



Amendment to Amended & Restated Outside Director Compensation Policy
(Adopted by Board of Directors November 2007)
    
    Exhibit 10.29.1
 CSK AUTO CORPORATION
 OUTSIDE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION POLICY
 A. Annual Stipend  Outside Directors.
 Amount and Form of Payment outside Company Fixed Fee 1
 Timing of Payment
    B. Annual Stipend  Non-Executive Chairman of the Board.
  C. Equity Grants.
 
 1
    
    For the purposes of this Policy, the date of the next
annual meeting of stockholders means, in cases where such date has not yet been
set, the anticipated date of the next annual meeting of stockholders. -1-




---



##### 



D. Meeting Fees and Expenses.
    E. Committee Chair Fees.
 Chair Fee
#### HOWARD v. COMMONWEALTH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 7, 1954.

J. Milton Luker, London, for appellant.

J. D. Buckman, Atty. Gen., William F. Simpson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This is a motion for an appeal from a' judgment of the Laurel Circuit Court convicting appellant of the offense of possessing a moonshine still in local option territory and fixing his punishment at 30 days in jail and a fine of $100.

An examination of the record discloses that appellant was not entitled to a directed verdict and the court properly submitted the case to the jury under appropriate instructions.

The motion is overruled, and the judgment is affirmed.