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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          21,992
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,364
<ALLOWANCES>                                       439
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,335
<PP&E>                                           4,244
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,030
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  31,805
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,439
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           140
<OTHER-SE>                                      22,397
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    31,805
<SALES>                                         13,620
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,620
<CGS>                                              599
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,230
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    60
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   9
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,231
<INCOME-TAX>                                       180
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,051
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,051
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 405

To prohibit the commercial operation of civil supersonic transport aircraft

to or from airports in the United States under certain circumstances.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 10, 1999

Mr. HOLLINGS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

A BILL

To prohibit the commercial operation of civil supersonic

transport aircraft to or from airports in the United

States under certain circumstances.

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

3 SECTION 1. COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF SUPERSONIC

4 TRANSPORT CATEGORY AIRCRAFT.

5 The Secretary of Transportation shall prohibit the

6 commercial operation of civil supersonic transport cat7 egory aircraft to or from an airport in the United States—

8 (1) if the Secretary determines that the Euro9 pean Union has adopted Common Position (EC) No.

10 66/98 as a final regulation, unless
2

S 405 IS

1 (2) the Secretary also determines that such air2 craft comply with Stage 3 noise levels.

Æ
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 4.11

                              CERTIFICATE OF TRUST
                                       OF
                            PARTNERRE CAPITAL TRUST I

     This Certificate of Trust of PartnerRe Capital Trust I (the "Trust"), dated
as of October 1, 2001, is being duly executed and filed by the undersigned, as
trustees, to form a business trust under the Delaware Business Trust Act (12
Del. C. (S) 3801, et seq.).
                  ------

     1.   Name. The name of the business trust formed hereby is PartnerRe
          ----
Capital Trust I.

     2.   Delaware Trustee. The name and business address of the trustee of the
          ----------------
Trust with a principal place of business in the State of Delaware is Chase
Manhattan Bank USA, National Association, 500 Stanton Christiana Road,
OPS4--3/rd/ Floor, Newark, Delaware 19173.

     3.   Effective Date. This Certificate of Trust shall be effective upon
          --------------
filing with the Secretary of the State of the State of Delaware.

<PAGE>

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being the trustees of the Trust, have
executed this Certificate of Trust as of the date first-above written.

                                    THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, as
                                    Property Trustee


                                    By: /s/ W.B. Dodge
                                       -----------------------------------
                                       Name: W.B. Dodge
                                       Title: Vice President


                                    CHASE MANHATTAN BANK USA,
                                    NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Delaware
                                    Trustee


                                    By:  /s/ Denis Kelly
                                       -----------------------------------
                                       Name: Denis Kelly
                                       Title: Assistant Vice President


                                    Administrative Trustee


                                    /s/ Albert Benchimol
                                    --------------------------------------
                                    Albert Benchimol, not in his individual
                                    capacity but solely as trustee of the Trust


                                    Administrative Trustee


                                    /s/ Christine Patton
                                    --------------------------------------
                                    Christine Patton, not in her individual
                                    capacity but solely as trustee of the Trust
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         October 18, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on October 8, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 449 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-42, K2025-41.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-24050 Filed 10-17-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-2173

MARCUS SMITH,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

LOWES COMPANIES, INC.,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at 

Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:21-cv-00034-RJC-SCR)

Submitted: March 12, 2024 Decided: March 14, 2024

Before GREGORY, RICHARDSON, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marcus Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Margaret Manos, Frederick Thomas Smith, SEYFARTH 

SHAW, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-2173 Doc: 10 Filed: 03/14/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Marcus Smith appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of 

the magistrate judge and dismissing Smith’s complaint for failure to timely exhaust 

administrative remedies. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.*

 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Smith v. Lowes Cos., No. 3:21-cv000034-RJC-SCR (W.D.N.C. Aug. 30, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court 

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* To the extent Smith seeks to supplement the record on appeal, we decline to 

consider evidence that was not presented to the district court. See Fed. R. App. P. 10(a); 

United States v. Redd, 85 F.4th 153, 168 n.13 (4th Cir. 2023) (“[T]he proper setting for 

developing the record is in the district court, not this Court in the first instance.”). 

USCA4 Appeal: 23-2173 Doc: 10 Filed: 03/14/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
* 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. 01-50182 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JOSE FLORES-SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. DR-00-CR-437-1

-------------------- August 23, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jose Flores-Sanchez appeals the 70-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. Flores-Sanchez argues that his sentence should not have exceeded the two-year maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Flores-Sanchez acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), butNo. 01-50182 -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). FloresSanchez’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.
Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION I, Jinzhao Wu, certify that:  1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of China Northern Medical Device, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2008;  2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4.  The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the small business issuer and have:  (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and  5.  The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.  Date:  May 13, 2008   /s/ Jinzhao Wu Jinzhao Wu President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
#### A. M. Dunton v. T. P. Dawley, Executor of the Estate of Bessie Dawley, Deceased, Appellant.

Estates: pleadings: denial op right to answer. In an action to establish a claim against an estate, it is not an abn.se of discretion to refuse the filing of an answer after the case is called for trial, in which matters are alleged that may be proven under a general denial, or alleging matters constituting a counterclaim.

*Appeal from Winneshiek District Court.*— Hon L. E. Eet.-lows, Judge.

Saturday, January 30, 1904.

The plaintiff’s claim against the estate is for $500 had and received by deceased, with interest from January 15, *5131896, and was filed August 24, 1901. The case was called for trial February 4, 1902, and the jury waived. Thereupon the executor filed an answer in four counts: (1) Denying the allegations of plaintiff; (2) alleging by way of counterclaim that subsequent to the death of decedent claimant took and appropriated to his own use about thirty articles of her property, valued at $5S.45; (3) during five years next preceding January, 1896, he enjoyed the rents and profits of a certain eighty acres of land, to the use of which deceased was entitled, amounting in all to $1,000; (4) that any money that deceased may have received was in payment of the moneys due her under the third count, and judgment was prayed for any balance found due. Plaintiff objected to the filing of the answer on the ground that he had had no notice, that permission was asked after the case was called for trial, and for that it pleaded a counterclaim. These objections were sustained, and the trial proceeded, resulting in the allowance of plaintiff’s claim. The executor apj>eais.—

*Affirmed.*

*Frank Sayre-*for appellant.

*E. P. Johnson*for appellee.

Ladd, J.

There was no abuse of discretion in not allowing the answer to be filed after the trial had been called and the jury waived. The defensive matter averred was admissible under the general denial the law interposes to all claims filed against an estate. The fourth count was not a plea of payment, but an allegation that the transaction by which deceased received the money was a payment of rents and profits due, rather than a loan. It was provable under a general denial because in direct contradiction of the theory on which plaintiff based his right to recover. The ruling with respect to the two counts setting up a counterclaim did not deprive the executor of a hearing. It merely denied him the right to inject new causes of action into a ease after a trial had begun, and compelled him to resort to another suit if he deemed his claims meritorious. The executor was not al*514lowed to prove the value of the use of the land. As there was no evidence tending to show the money claimed was paid thereon, the ruling was right. The finding of the trial judge is as conclusive as the verdict of a jury. It is supported by the evidence, and the judgment must be affirmed. '
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from SEC Form
10-Q for quarter ending June 30, 1997 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          14,053
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,882
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,215
<INVENTORY>                                      6,535
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                55,939
<PP&E>                                         449,692
<DEPRECIATION>                                  69,712
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 486,638
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           53,161
<BONDS>                                        234,858
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           121
<OTHER-SE>                                     143,791
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   486,638
<SALES>                                        131,628
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               131,628
<CGS>                                           99,840
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  116,877
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,529
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,261
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,961
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,034
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,927
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,927
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .24
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3084 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3084

 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for State 
 accreditation of diabetes self-management training programs under the 
                           Medicare Program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 20, 2000

   Mr. Hatch introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for State 
 accreditation of diabetes self-management training programs under the 
                           Medicare Program.

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

SECTION 1. STATE ACCREDITATION OF DIABETES SELF-MANAGEMENT TRAINING 
              PROGRAMS.

    Section 1861(qq)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
1395x(qq)(2)) is amended--
            (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by striking 
        ``paragraph (1)--'' and inserting ``paragraph (1):'';
            (2) in subparagraph (A)--
                    (A) by striking ``a `certified provider''' and 
                inserting ``A `certified provider'''; and
                    (B) by striking ``; and'' and inserting a period; 
                and
            (3) in subparagraph (B)--
                    (A) by striking ``a physician, or such other 
                individual'' and inserting ``(i) A physician, or such 
                other individual'';
                    (B) by inserting ``(I)'' before ``meets applicable 
                standards'';
                    (C) by inserting ``(II)'' before ``is recognized'';
                    (D) by inserting ``, or by a program described in 
                clause (ii),'' after ``recognized by an organization 
                that represents individuals (including individuals 
                under this title) with diabetes''; and
                    (E) by adding at the end the following new clause:
            ``(ii) Notwithstanding any reference to `a national 
        accreditation body' in section 1865(b), for purposes of clause 
        (i), a program described in this clause is a program operated 
        by a State for the purposes of accrediting diabetes self-
        management training programs, if the Secretary determines that 
        such State program has established quality standards that meet 
        or exceed the standards established by the Secretary under 
        clause (i) or the standards originally established by the 
        National Diabetes Advisory Board and subsequently revised as 
        described in clause (i).''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.2certification pursuant to 18 u.s.c. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of thesarbanes-oxley act of 2002The undersigned officer of Veridien Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies to my knowledgethat the Company’s annual report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the“Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission the on date hereof, fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. This certification isprovided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed to be part of the Report or “filed” for anypurpose whatsoever.         Date: March 30, 2006   Name: /s/ Russell Van Zandt         Russell Van Zandt      Title: Chief Financial Officer