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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE J. CREW
OPERATING CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF
INCOME FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JANUARY 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           9,643
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    156,022
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               221,068
<PP&E>                                         184,327
<DEPRECIATION>                                (64,577)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 353,779
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          118,674
<BONDS>                                        194,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (4,445)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   353,779
<SALES>                                        816,221
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               824,258
<CGS>                                          460,592
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  817,596
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (10,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              28,560
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (11,898)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,227
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,671)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,671)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000

<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                           APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                             SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                            84
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    907
<ALLOWANCES>                                      16
<INVENTORY>                                    1,021
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2,107
<PP&E>                                           888
<DEPRECIATION>                                   661
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,829
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,472
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                         211
<OTHER-SE>                                       813
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2,829
<SALES>                                        2,449
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2,449
<CGS>                                          1,100
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,150
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                24
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  174
<INCOME-TAX>                                      69
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              105
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                     105
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    .05



</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BARBARA K. PARMENTER,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, Not in its individual capacity but as trustee for BCAT 2017

- 19TT and BCAT 201719TT; SHELLPOINT MORTGAGE SERVICING,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 20

- 35696

D.C. No. 6:20

- cv

- 00792

- MK

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Michael J. McShane, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 18, 2021 * *

Before: CANBY, FRIEDLAND, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.

Barbara K. Parmenter appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

dismissing her action alleging federal and state law claims and seeking to prevent

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAY 25 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 35696

foreclosure on property in Oregon. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

We affirm.

In her opening brief, Parmenter fail ed to address any of the grounds for

dismissal and has therefore waived her challenge to the district court ’ s order

dismissing her action for failure to prosecute

. See Indep. Towers of Wash. v.

Washington , 350 F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir. 2003) (“[W]e will not consider any claims

tha t were not actually argued in appellant’s opening brief.”); Acosta

- Huerta v.

Estelle , 7 F.3d 139, 144 (9th Cir. 1993) (issues not supported by argument in pro se

appellant’s opening brief are waived); see also Greenwood v. FAA , 28 F.3d 971,

977 (9th Cir. 1 994) (“We will not manufacture arguments for an appellant , and a

bare assertion does not preserve a claim . . . .”)

.

We do not consider Parmenter’s renewed request for appointment of counsel

set forth in her opening brief. In Docket Entry No. 18, this court denied

Parmenter’s motion for appointment of counsel and ordered that no motions for

reconsideration, clarification, or modification of the denial shall be filed or

entertained.

All other pending motions and requests are denied.

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>   1
Exhibit 12


                         ADVANTA CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                             (Dollars in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           Three Months Ended
                                                                March 31,
                                                         -------------------------
                                                         1998                 1997
                                                         -------------------------
<S>                                                   <C>                  <C>
     Net earnings                                     $ 418,787            $ (19,818)
Federal and state
  income taxes                                          (21,459)              (6,891)
                                                        --------              -------

Earnings before income
  taxes                                                 397,328              (26,709)
                                                        -------              --------


Fixed charges:
  Interest                                               67,544               71,462
  One-third of all rentals (A)                              835                  820
  Preferred stock dividend of
   subsidiary trust                                       2,248                2,248
                                                          -----                -----
Total fixed charges                                      70,627               74,530
                                                         ------               ------

Earnings before income
  taxes and fixed charges                               467,955               47,821


Ratio of earnings to fixed
  charges (A)                                              6.63                  (B)
</TABLE>


(A)   For purposes of computing these ratios, "earnings" represent income before
      income taxes plus fixed charges. "Fixed charges" consist of interest
      expense, one-third (the proportion deemed representative of the interest
      factor) of rental expense on operating leases, and preferred stock
      dividends of subsidiary trust.

(B)   For the three months ended March 31, 1998, earnings were inadequate to
      cover fixed charges. The deficiency was approximately $26.7 million.




                                       35
i

NO. 03-15-00522-CV

In the Third Court of Appeals

Austin, Texas

MICHAEL W. SCHUETZ AND JAMIE K. SCHUETZ, APPELLANTS

v.

SOURCE ONE MORTGAGE SERVICES CORPORATION; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC 

REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; CITIMORTGAGE, INC.; BARRETT DAFFIN 

FRAPPIER TURNER & ENGLE; ROBERT FERGUSON, AND BARBARA FERGUSON,

APPELLEES

APPEAL FROM CAUSE NO. C2013-1445C

274TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS

HON. DIB WALDRIP PRESIDING

APPELLANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

TO FILE BRIEF

Stephen Casey

Texas Bar No. 24065015

CASEY LAW OFFICE, P.C.

595 Round Rock West Drive

Suite 102

Round Rock, Texas 78681

Telephone: 512-257-1324

Fax: 512-853-4098

stephen@caseylawoffice.us

ORAL 

ARGUMENT

REQUESTED

Counsel for Appellants

Michael W. Schuetz and Jamie K. Schuetz

ACCEPTED

03-15-00522-CV

7378928

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

10/14/2015 4:14:41 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 10/14/2015 4:14:41 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
1

GROUNDS FOR MOTION

1. Appellant’s Brief was due to be filed in Court on October 5, 2015.

2. Appellant’s counsel did not receive any notice informing counsel of the date the 

brief was due in Court, therefore missing the due date.

3. The Court has issued a new due date of October 19, 2015. 

4. Appellant is asking for a 30-day extension, making the due date November 18, 

2015.

5. This is Appellant’s first request for an extension.

PRAYER

For the foregoing reasons, Appellant prays the Court will grant the motion.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Stephen Casey

Stephen Casey

Texas Bar No. 24065015

595 Round Rock West Drive, Suite 102

Round Rock, Texas 78681

Telephone: 512-257-1324

Fax: 512-853-4098

stephen@caseylawoffice.us
2

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

I hereby certify that I have conferenced with opposing counsels, via e-mail 

on October 14, 2015. Opposing counsels are unopposed to the Motion for

Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief.

/s/Stephen Casey 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing motion has 

been served on Wednesday, October 14, 2015, on the following via electronic

transmission: 

David L. Foster

Locke Lord LLP

600 Congress Avenue, Suite 2200

Austin, TX 78701

(512) 305-4700-Phone

(512) 305-4800-Fax

dfoster@lockelord.com

Mark D. Hopkins

Hopkins & Williams, P.L.L.C.

12117 Bee Caves Road, Suite 260

Austin, TX 78738

(512) 600-4320-Phone

(512) 600-4326-Fax

mark@hopkinswilliams.com
3

David G. Pfeuffer

Brazle & Pfeuffer

170 E. San Antonio Street

New Braunfels, TX 78130

(830) 629-8008-Phone

(830) 629-2161-Fax

dpfeuffer@nblawyers.net

/s/ Stephen Casey
#### McCARTY v. STATE.

No. 24270.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 23, 1949.

No attorney for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

*855GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of transporting intoxicating liquor in a dry area. His punishment was assessed at a fine of $100.00 and confinement' in the county jail for six months.

The State’s Attorney before this court has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the transcript contains no notice of appeal. Such is required by Article 827, C.C.P., in order to confer jurisdiction herein.

The State’s motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is ordered dismissed.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 5, 2022

No. 04-21-00432-CV

Alejandro CEPEDA,

Appellant

v.

KOZA HOME SOLUTIONS, LLC, Hector Santos, Legend Title and Abstract, LLC,

Appellees

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020-CVF-000579-D1

Honorable Honorable Jose A. Lopez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On April 25, 2022, Appellees Hector Santos and Koza Home Solutions, LLC filed a Joint 

Motion to Abate Appeal, or Alternatively, for Extension of Time to File Appellees’ Briefs Due 

to Extenuating Circumstances. After considering the motion and appellant’s response, we 

GRANT IN PART the motion and extend the deadline for Appellees to file their respective 

briefs to May 25, 2022.

_________________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 5th day of May, 2022.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2007-5150

DANIEL D. PIERCE

and HENDY J. LUND,

Plai ntiffs-Appellants,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee.

Brian G. Isaacson , Isaacson & Wilson, P.S., of S eattle, Washington, argued for

plaintiffs-appellants.

Marion E.M. Erickson , Attorney, Tax Division, Un ited States Department of

Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were

Richard T. Morrison , Acting Assistant Attorney General, and Richard Farber , Attorney.

Of counsel was Randolph L. Hutter , Attorney

Appealed from: United States Court of Federal Claims

Judge Susan G. BradenNOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2007-5150

DANIEL D. PIERCE,

and HENDY J. LUND,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee.



## Judgment

ON APPEAL from the United States Court of Federal Claims

in CASE NO(S). 05-CV-1071

This CAUSE having been hear d and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam (LINN, Circuit Judge , CLEVENGER, Senior Circuit Judge , and

PROST, Circuit Judge ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED April 14, 2008 /s/ Jan Horbaly___________________

Jan Horbaly, Clerk
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, Pub. L. 94-409, that the Securities and Exchange Commission will hold the following meeting during the week of February 7, 2000.

A closed meeting will be held on Wednesday, February 9, 2000 at 11:00 a.m.

Commissioner Unger, as duty officer, determined that no earlier notice thereof was possible.

Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters may also be present.

The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4), (8), (9)(A) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(4), (8), (9)(A) and (10), permit consideration for the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.

Commissioner Unger, as duty officer, voted to consider the item listed for the closed meeting in a closed session.

                    The subject matter of the closed meeting scheduled for Wednesday, February 9, 2000 is:                     **amicus participation.**

At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting items.  For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, please contact: The office of the Secretary at (202) 942-7070.

Dated: February 2, 2000.

Jonathan G. Katz,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-2721  Filed 2-2-00; 4:02 pm]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 37196

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

DAVID LEROY LINN,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2010 Unpublished Opinion No. 656

Filed: October 5, 2010

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Bonneville County. Hon. Gregory S. Anderson, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of seven years, with a minimum 

period of confinement of one year, for felony driving under the influence, 

affirmed.

Molly J. Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender; Sarah E. Tompkins, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

______________________________________________

Before LANSING, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

David Leroy Linn pled guilty to felony driving under the influence. I.C. §§ 18-8004, 18-

8005(5), 18-8008. The district court sentenced Linn to a unified term of seven years, with a 

minimum period of confinement of one year. Linn appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court's discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 
2

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Linn’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
The Ho norable James Maxwell Moody, United States District Judge for th e 1 Eastern District of Arkansas. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 96-4234

___________ Josette C. Teaff, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Arlington Hotel; Cathy Armstrong; * [UNPUBLISHED] Michele Boatwright, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: December 30, 1997 Filed: January 7, 1998

___________ Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Josette C . Teaff appeals the district court & s grant of summary judgment to one 1 defendantand the dismissal of two others in her action brought under Title VII, 4 2 U.S.C. §§ 2000e - 2000e-17. After a careful review of the record and the parties & submissions on appeal, we conclude the district court was correct and an extende d di scussion is unnecessary. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.-2-

A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
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**




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned Officer of Flagship Global Health,
      Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that the
      Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007
      (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
      15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/
      John H. Flood III


John
      H.
      Flood III


Chief
      Executive Officer




Date:
      March 28, 2008
#### TATE v. STATE.

No. 24385.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 25, 1949.

Chas. Nordyke, Stephenville, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

This purports to be a conviction for driving an automobile upon a public highway while intoxicated, with punishment assessed at a fine of $150.

The record fails to reflect the judgment o’f the trial court, without which this court has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Berry v. State, 138 Tex.Cr.R. 563, 138 S.W.2d 105; Davis v. State, 145 Tex.Cr.R. 188, 167 S.W.2d 523; and Sharp v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 219 S.W.2d 810.

The appeal is dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3213 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3213

 Making appropriations for all departments and agencies of the Federal 
        Government for fiscal year 2014, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 28, 2013

 Mr. Grayson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
 Committee on Appropriations, and in addition to the Committee on Ways 
 and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 
 in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
                jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 Making appropriations for all departments and agencies of the Federal 
        Government for fiscal year 2014, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Anti-Self-Destruction Act'' or the 
``Fiscal Sanity Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014.

    There is hereby appropriated for fiscal year 2014--
            (1) for each project or activity for which budget authority 
        was provided in the Consolidated and Further Continuing 
        Appropriations Act, 2013 (Public Law 113-6), an amount equal to 
        the budget authority provided in such Act, as reduced pursuant 
        to the Presidential sequestration order dated March 1, 2013, to 
        remain available for a comparable period of availability; and
            (2) for entitlements and other mandatory payments whose 
        budget authority was provided in appropriations Acts for fiscal 
        year 2013, and for activities under the Food and Nutrition Act 
        of 2008, such amounts as may be necessary to maintain program 
        levels under current law.

SEC. 3. NONAPPLICABILITY OF DEBT CEILING THROUGH CALENDAR YEAR 2014.

    Section 3101(b) of title 31, United States Code, shall not apply 
for the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and 
ending on December 31, 2014.
                                 <all>
```