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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000925752
<NAME> CHANCELLOR BROADCASTING LICENSEE COMPANY
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       5,111,562
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               42,988,628
<ALLOWANCES>                                   816,273
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            49,238,492
<PP&E>                                      57,117,405
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,035,570
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             705,183,991
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       14,887,483
<BONDS>                                    260,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      103,852,579
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                 201,878,413
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               705,183,991
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           122,838,321
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               98,853,171
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               130,164
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               482,624
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          24,468,693
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (613,707)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,201,361
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,815,068)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              5,609,188
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (8,424,256)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 6182** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. ANGELO GALLOWAY, a/k/a Gelo , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk
. Mark S. Davis , District Judge. ( 2:10

- cr - 00096

- MS D

- TEM

- 2 )

Submitted : April 24, 2014 Decided: April 29, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD , and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Angelo Galloway, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, Benjamin L. Hatch, Assistant United States Attorneys, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in t his circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Angelo Galloway seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for an evidentiary hearing in his 28
U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) proceedings. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (20 12 ), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1292 (20 12 ); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 , 545

- 46 (1949). The order Galloway seeks to appeal , which was entered prior to the court’s ruling on Galloway’s § 2255 motion, is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Nor could it have been certified for immediate appealability under Rule 54(b). In re Bryson , 406 F.3d 284, 287

- 88 (4th Cir. 2005); Equip. Fin. Grp. , Inc. v. Travers e Computer Broker s , 973 F.2d 345, 347

- 48 (4th Cir. 1992). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.

DISMISSED
**Exhibit
      32.2**








**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 Quarterly Report of clickNsettle.com, Inc. (the “Company”)
      on Form 10-QSB for the three and six months ended December 31, 2005 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Form
      10-QSB”), I, Patricia Giuliani-Rheaume, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
      certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that;





(3)
            The
                Form 10-QSB fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
                or 15(d)
                of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
                and





(4)
            The
                information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
                material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.








Dated:
      February 9, 2006








/s/
      Patricia Giuliani-Rheaume


Patricia
      Giuliani-Rheaume - Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
      Treasurer
Order entered August 2 1 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 15
- 00957
- CV BRIAN A. SMALE, Appellant

V. JOHN S. SMALE, Appellee On Appeal from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 429
- 50581
- 2014



### O RDER
T he Court is in receipt of the attached notice of nonrepresentation filed by Evaleen M. Davis

. In the notice, Ms. Davis informs the Court she represented appellee in the trial court only. She further informs the Court appellee is deceased, and she is unaware of anyone appearing on behalf of appellee’s estate. Because it does not appear a copy of the notice was sent to appellant and the notice does not give appellee’s last known address and telephone number as required by Texas Rule s of Appellate Procedure 6.4(a) and 9.5(a) , the Court DIRECTS Ms. Davis to file an amended notice complying with the rule s . The Court further DIRECTS Ms. Davis to include in the notice (1) the name s and contact information for the heirs and executor or administrator of appellee’s estate or (2) a written statement s he is unaware of anyexecutor, administrator or heir

. See T EX
. R. C IV
. P. 152; Casillas v. Cano , 79 S.W.3d 587, 591

(Tex. App.

— Corpus Christi 2002, order).

/s/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-12-00538- CR

Cheri Lucille How ard, Appellan t

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F B ELL COUNTY , 27TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. 696 90, TH E H ONO RAB LE JO E CARROLL, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Ap pellant Cheri Lucille Howar d appea ls from a judgme nt convicting h er o f possession of a controlled substance less than one g ram, enhanc ed. See Tex. Hea lth & Safety Code Ann. § 481.115 (West 2010).

Appellant’s court-a

ppointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appea l is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the require ments of Anders v. Calif

ornia by prese nting a profe ssional evalua tion of the rec ord demonstrating why there

are no arg

uable grounds to be advanc ed. See Anders v. Calif ornia , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Garner v. State , 300 S.W .3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1 9 8 8 ). Appellant rec eived a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of her right to examine t h e appellate rec ord and to f

ile a pro se brief

. See Anders , 386 U.S. a

t 744. Appellant has filed letters with the Court. Although she raises the failure to rec eive eff ective counsel as a possible g round forappea l, she reque sts that the appea l be dismiss ed. We have independe ntly revie wed the rec ord and

find no reve rsible err or. See Garner , 300 S.W .3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W .3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2 0 0 5 ). W e ag ree with appellant’ s counsel that the rec ord ref lects no arg uably meritorious g rounds for r eview a nd that the appe al is frivolous. Howeve r, as pointed out by appellant’ s counsel in his brief, the judgm en t o rder s appellant to pay court costs of $306 and attorney ’s fee s of $450 afte r rele ase from incar cer ation. “A defe ndant who is deter

mined by the court t o b e i n dige nt is presumed to rema in indige nt for the

rema inder of the proce eding s in the case unless a materia l chang e in the defe ndant’s finan ci al circ umstances occur s.” Tex. Code Crim. P ro c. An n. art. 26.04(p) (West Supp. 2012); Maye r

v. State , 309 S.W .3d 552, 557 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010). The trial court deter mined that appellant was indige nt, and we find nothing in the rec ord to support a finding that appel l an t ’s financ ial circ umstances have materia lly chang ed. There fore , no evidenc e supports the trial court’s order requiring appellant to pay court costs and attorney ’s fe es . S ee Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.05(g ) (West Supp. 2012). Acc ording ly , we modify the judgme nt to ref lect that appellant does not

owe c ourt costs or attorne y ’s fe es.

As modified, the judgme nt of conviction is aff irmed and counsel’s motion to withdraw is g rante d.

2__________________________________________ Melissa Goodwin, Jus tice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Goodwin and F ield Modified and, a s Modified, Aff irmed Filed: F ebrua

ry 28, 2013 Do Not Publish

3
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the quarterly report of Movie Gallery, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Thomas D. Johnson, Jr., 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.

Date: June 27, 2008



|                            
|----------------------------
|/s/ Thomas D. Johnson, Jr.  
|Name: Thomas D. Johnson, Jr.
|Its: Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       1,144
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,300
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,444
<PP&E>                                      31,064
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              36,828
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,178
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                              1,000,000
<COMMON>                                   405,000
<OTHER-SE>                                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                35,828
<SALES>                                      9,374
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,374
<CGS>                                        1,577
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            36,146
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  0
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (28,349)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                               (28,349)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0


</TABLE>
#### Ferris v. Anderson.

1. Appeal: practice: evidence not made of record. Where it appears by the abstract of appellee, which is not denied, that no report of the evidence taken by the short-hand reporter was ever filed in the court below in any form whatever, this court cannot consider assignments of error founded upon rulings of the court upon the admission and exclusion of evidence.

*Appeal from Keokuk Superior Gourt.*

Thursday, October 6.

This is an action upon a promissory note. The defendant, Anderson, was charged as guarantor. There was a trial by the court without a jury, and a judgment was rendered few tire defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

Graig, *McQrary*Graig, for appellant.

Anderson, *Davis do*Ilagerman, for appellee.

Rothrock, J.-

The assignments of error are founded upon rulings of the court upon the admission and exclusion of evidence. It appears from an abstract filed by the appel-lee that the evidence has in no manner been made of record in the case; and a motion is presented to strike from the appellant’s abstract what purports to be the evidence in the case. Appellee sets out in his abstract what he claims to be the bill of exceptions, in which reference is made to the evidence as taken down and transcribed by a short-hand reporter. But he avers in his abstract that “ no report of the evidence is or ever was filed in the said cause in the form of short-hand notes, or a transcript thereof, or in any other form whatever.” The abstract of appellee is not denied by appellant. In this condition of the record it is apparent that we cannot determine the errors assigned; and the result is, the judgment of the superior court must be

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 211 (Thursday, October 31, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 86852]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25286]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

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 31, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
October 23, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 522 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-144, K2025-142.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-25286 Filed 10-30-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
# Rupprecht Law P. A. 3 24 Datura Street , Suite 200 | West Palm Beach, FL 33401 P: (561) 222 - 6979 | E : jon@jrupprechtlaw.com | W: www.jrupprechtlaw.com September 2 , 2015 U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12 - 140, Washington, DC 20590 RE: Receipt of Confidentially Submitted D ocuments for Higher Perspective Cinema, Inc. Dear Sir or Madam: Higher Perspective Cinema, Inc. ( Docket ID: FAA - 2015 - 3712 ) confidentially submitted to 333exemptions@faa.gov the follow documents: 1) Flight Operations & Procedures Manual (FOPM) 2) M otion Picture & Television Operating Manual (MPTOM) 3) Aircraft Flight Manual - Freefly Alta 4) Aircraft Flight Manual - DJI Inspire 1 5) Aircraft Flight Manual - Cinestar X8 6) PIC Qualification Process, Test & Logbook 7) VO Qualification Process & Test A receipt was obtained on Wednesday , September 2 , 2015 . If I can be of any assistance to further expedite this petition, please do not hesitate to contact me at (561)222 - 6979 or at my email jon@jrupprechtlaw.com Sincerely yours,

_____________________ Jonathan Rupprecht, Esq.
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.                  

###### Consumer Product Safety Commission

# TIME AND DATE: 

                        Wednesday, October 30, 2024—10:00 a.m. (See                         **MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED**                        ).                    

# PLACE: 

The meeting will be held remotely, and in person at 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 20814.

                        To attend the meeting remotely, please use the following link:                         *https://cpsc.webex.com/​cpsc/​j.php?​MTID=​m316a2dd3fc8c521a03226e1fc2027958.*

# STATUS: 

Commission Meeting—Open to the Public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

*Decisional Matter:*                         FY 2025 Operating Plan.                    

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Alberta E. Mills, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East-West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, 301-504-7479 (Office) or 240-863-8938 (Cell).

Dated: October 23, 2024.

Alberta E. Mills,

Commission Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2024-25066 Filed 10-24-24; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Julia A. Vogel, Deceased.

Surrogate’s Court, Bronx County,

November 19, 1937.

*Leonard P. Moore,*for Arthur B. Vogel and William H. Acton, as executors, etc.

Henderson, S.

In this proceeding to settle the executors’ account, to which no objections have been filed, the petitioners seek a construction of the following paragraphs of the decedent’s will:

“ *Second.*All the rest, residue and remainder of my estate, real, personal and mixed, and wheresoever situated, whereof I may be seized or possessed or to which I may be in any manner entitled, or in which I may be interested at the time of my death, I give, bequeath and devise to my trustees hereinafter named, In Trust, Nevertheless, for the following uses and purposes:

*917“ To hold, invest and reinvest the same; to collect and receive the rents, issues, income and profits therefrom, and after the payment of all necessary expenses, to pay over the net income therefrom to my sister Emma Cornelia Vogel, for and during the term of her natural life.

*“ Third.*I direct that the payment of income to my said sister Emma Cornelia Vogel shall be made in quarterly or monthly installments as far as practicable. In the event that the annual income shall fall below Fifteen hundred Dollars, then I authorize, empower and direct my said trustees, in their discretion, to pay over unto my said sister Emma Cornelia Vogel out of the principal of said trust such additional sum as may be necessary to bring the annual amount received by her therefrom up to the sum of Fifteen hundred Dollars.”

The testatrix limited the time of enjoyment of her gift of income to the lifetime of the donee thereof. She also limited the amount of the annual invasion of the principal which her trustees, in their discretion, could make for the benefit of such donee. Although the testatrix made no gift of the principal other than such possible invasion, she clearly expressed her intention to limit the amount of the principal which the trust beneficiary could receive each year. The executors urge the application of the rule of construction that a gift of income without mention of principal is a gift of the principal. *(Hatch*v. *Bassett, 52*N. Y. 359, 362.) Where, however, it is clear, as in the will before me, that the testamentary intent is inconsistent with the rule, the rule must yield to the stronger force of intention. *(Paterson*v. *Ellis,*11 Wend. 259, 298; *Locke*v. *F. L. & T. Co.,*140 N. Y. 135, 146, 149.)

The testatrix created a valid trust of her residuary estate which terminates upon the death of the beneficiary or upon the prior exhaustion of the principal by the authorized invasions. The remainder of the residuary trust passes as intestate property to the trust beneficiary, who is the sole distributee of the decedent. There is no incongruity in the income beneficiary having a vested remainder *(Doane*v. *Mercantile Trust Co.,*160 N. Y. 494, 499), and her two estates do not merge.

Submit decree settling the account and construing the will accordingly.
#### Wellington Hall, Inc., Appellant, vs. Innes, Defendant: Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance Company, Respondent.

For the appellant: *Harvey C. Hartwig*and *Chester J. Nieb-ler,*both of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *Michael Levin*of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.