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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           5,227
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   52,513
<ALLOWANCES>                                    13,526
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                45,831
<PP&E>                                       2,358,252
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,231,069
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 174,064
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          644,350
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       799,187
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,324,310)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   174,064
<SALES>                                         38,869
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                60,269
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   30,102
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                87,943
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (57,776)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (57,776)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (57,776)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (007)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (007)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-39369 on Form S-8 of our report dated March 25, 2004 (March 2, 2005 as to
the effects of the discontinued operations in fiscal 2004 described in Note 4),
relating to the financial statements of Boykin Lodging Company and our report
dated March 12, 2004, relating to the financial statements of Boykin/AEW, LLC
and subsidiaries appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Boykin Lodging
Company for the year ended December 31, 2004.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Cleveland, Ohio
March 14, 2005
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1545 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1545

To require a quarterly report by the Federal Communications Commission 
     on the Lifeline program funded by the Universal Service Fund.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 10, 2015

  Mr. Vitter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require a quarterly report by the Federal Communications Commission 
     on the Lifeline program funded by the Universal Service Fund.

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

SECTION 1. REPORT ON LIFELINE PROGRAM.

    (a) Definition.--In this section--
            (1) the term ``Lifeline program'' means the Lifeline 
        program of the Federal Communications Commission set forth 
        under subpart E of part 54 of title 47, Code of Federal 
        Regulations, or any successor thereto; and
            (2) the term ``participating carrier'' means an eligible 
        telecommunications carrier that receives universal service 
        support under sections 214(e) and 254 of the Communications Act 
        of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 214(e) and 254) for the provision of service 
        through the Lifeline program.
    (b) Report Required.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
enactment of this Act, and quarterly thereafter, the Federal 
Communications Commission shall submit to Congress a report on the 
Lifeline program that includes, with respect to the period covered by 
the report--
            (1) aggregate expenditures on the Lifeline program;
            (2) a list of each payment made to a participating carrier 
        for the provision of service through the Lifeline program, 
        including, in the case of a participating carrier that is 
        reimbursed for the provision of service to both wireless and 
        wireline subscribers, the amount of the payment that 
        corresponds to each type of service; and
            (3) the average cost per subscriber, across all the 
        participating carriers, to provide the service that the 
        Lifeline program subsidizes, broken down by wireless and 
        wireline subscribers and averaged per subscriber.
                                 <all>
```
ex4-1.htm


    Exhibit
4.1

     

    
                             INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE
                                STATE OF NEVADA
NUMBER                                                                  SHARES

                                 SCN Holdings Inc.
CAPITAL STOCK: 100,000,000 SARES AT $0.0010 PAR VALUE, PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE


      This is to certify that



                                  S P E C I M E N


is the record holder of


shares of
transferrable only on the books of the corporation by the holder hereof in person or

      by attorney upon surrender of this certificate properly endorsed.  

      In Witness Whereof, the said Corporation has caused this certificate to be signed by 

      its duly authorized officers and its Corporate Seal to be hereunto affixed.

this _________________ day of __________________ A.D.


President                          	    		    	    Secretary
                                      Seal


      
        
          
          

        

        
          
          

          
            

          

        

        
          
          

        

      

      The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations.

TEN COM  as tenants in common		UNIF GIFT MIN ACT  _______  Custodian ______
TEN ENT  as tenants by the entireties			    (cust)	      (Minor)
JT TEN	 as joint tenants with right of			under the Uniform Gifts to
survivorship and not as tenants	(State)				Minors Act
in common

Additional abbreviations may also be used although not in the above list.

For value received,	hereby sell, assign and transfer unto


PLEASE INSERT-SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER
IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE



PLEASE PRINT OR TYPWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS OF ASSIGNEE

									Shares

represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute
and appoint________________________________________________________________
Attorney to transfer the said shares on the books of the within-named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.

(Dated,


In presence of
# CE2004078EN.01059501.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/595 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/595

---

(2004/C 78 E/0629)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3576/03

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 December 2003)

Subject:   EU Identity document for the disabled

Subject:

Some 37 million citizens of the EU — or ten per cent of the population — suffer from some kind of disability. European Year of People with Disabilities which ends in a few weeks' time should provide a fresh impetus and achieve practical results in the fight for the equal treatment of disabled EU citizens so as to enable them to participate fully in all areas of life in future.

One step in this direction would be the introduction of a Europe-wide identity document for the disabled guaranteeing facilities and privileges regardless of nationality and making them readily available to all disabled persons. In my Written Question E-2173/02 (1) of 18 July 2002 I already pointed to the need for such an identity document for the disabled.

1

Since each Member State is free to determine the scope of the facilities and privileges accorded to the disabled, a uniform EU identity document for the disabled is needed. It should guarantee each disabled citizen of the Union the same rights in each country.

Will the Commission answer the following questions:

| — | Has the EU already developed initial ideas about the introduction of an identity document for the disabled which is valid throughout the EU? |
| --- | --- |

—

Has the EU already developed initial ideas about the introduction of an identity document for the disabled which is valid throughout the EU?

| — | If so, will it say what these ideas are? |
| --- | --- |

—

If so, will it say what these ideas are?

| — | If not, does it not agree that an identity document for the disabled which is valid throughout the EU should be introduced? |
| --- | --- |

—

If not, does it not agree that an identity document for the disabled which is valid throughout the EU should be introduced?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(28 January 2004)

(28 January 2004)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to his earlier written question E-2173/02 (2). As is clearly stated therein, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, the decision concerning the definition of disability and thus eligibility for disability cards is taken at national level.

2

---

(1)  OJ C 277 E, 14.11.2002, p. 257.

1

(2)  OJ C 277 E, 14.11.2002, p. 257.

2

---
# CE2004078EN.01056201.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/562 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/562

---

(2004/C 78 E/0597)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3482/03

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(24 November 2003)

Subject:   Legal privilege of documents between companies and their law firms

Subject:

Does the Commission regard correspondence between companies and their law firms as ‘legally privileged’ in anti-cartel cases?

If so, what is to prevent companies arranging their cartels via their lawyers in order to avoid detection?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2004)

(8 January 2004)

The Commission fully recognises that correspondence between companies and their law firms can be ‘legally privileged’. This recognition is in accordance with the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance. The jurisprudence sets out the conditions for such privilege. Thus, according to the case law, the confidentiality of written communications between lawyer and client is protected provided that, on the one hand, such communications are made for the purposes and in the interests of the client's rights of defence and on the other hand, they emanate from independent lawyers, that is to say, lawyers who are not bound to the client by a relationship of employment.

The second part of the question of the Honourable Member is of utmost concern to the Commission in connection with the effective enforcement of Article 81 of the EC Treaty. To that effect, the above case law imposes conditions so as to avoid abuse of legal privilege by companies. Documents are only protected if they are written communications solely for requesting the lawyer's advice for the purposes of the rights of defence.

---
99-826.

#### Joseph v. CSX Transp. Co.

Seneca App. No. 13-98-68. Discretionary appeal allowed.

Cook, J.,

would hold this cause for the decision in 99-219, 222, 223 and 224, *Karr v. Borchardt,*Seneca App. Nos. 13-98-33, 13-98-36, 13-98-35 and 13-98-34.

Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., dissent.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                            9
<CIK>                         0000887919
<NAME>                        Premier Financial Bancorp, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1999
<CASH>                                         28,227
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          1,634
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               25,197
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                   151,787
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         18,633
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           18,585
<LOANS>                                       570,106
<ALLOWANCE>                                     6,812
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                852,468
<DEPOSITS>                                    692,843
<SHORT-TERM>                                   32,507
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             4,819
<LONG-TERM>                                    70,172
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                        1,103
<OTHER-SE>                                     51,024
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                852,468
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                50,649
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              10,984
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                1,239
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               62,872
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             27,808
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             34,207
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          28,665
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   3,294
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 17
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                22,630
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 6,517
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      4,590
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    4,590
<EPS-BASIC>                                       .88
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .88
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   4.04<F1>
<LOANS-NON>                                     4,540
<LOANS-PAST>                                    1,721
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                  666
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                     0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                5,673<F2>
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   2,556
<RECOVERIES>                                      401
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               6,812
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            6,812
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             0
<FN>
<F1>Computed as tax-equivalent basis
<F2>Includes allowance through acquisition
</FN>




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

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           6,576
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                60,673
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     31,606
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                             740
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               726
<LOANS>                                        100,367
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,600
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 216,282
<DEPOSITS>                                     170,858
<SHORT-TERM>                                     3,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,180
<LONG-TERM>                                     15,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        111
<COMMON>                                           293
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 216,282
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,337
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,105
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    29
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,471
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 928
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,194
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,277
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       75
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,997
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,375
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,375
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,299
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                     5.0
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,525
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,600
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,600
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

In the Interest of D.W.G.K. and S.F.R.K., 

Minor Children

No. 06-17-00124-CV

Appeal from the 336th District Court of 

Fannin County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. FA-16-

42653). Opinion delivered by Justice 

Burgess, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Moseley participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellants adequately indicated their inability to pay costs of appeal. 

Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED AUGUST 6, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 7302** 

EDWARD JAMES EGAN, SR. , Petitioner

– Appellant ,
v. GENE JOHNSON, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections , Respondent

– Appellee
.

Appeal fr om the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Roanoke
. Glen E. Conrad, Chief District Judge. ( 7:10

- cv - 00336

- gec - mfu )

Submitted : January 13, 2011 Decided: January 20, 2011

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN , Circuit Judg es.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Edward James Egan, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Edward James Egan, Sr., seeks to ap peal the district court’s order dis miss ing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (2006) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substan tial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessmen t of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both tha t the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Egan has not made the requisi te showing. Accordingly, we 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 materials3 before the court and argument would not aid the deci sional
process. DISMISSED
NRO selects 2003 class of Pioneers

5 September, 2003 

The National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) has selected its Pioneer Class of 2003 - four people 

who made significant and lasting contributions to the discipline of national reconnaissance. The 

four selectees are Mr. Carl Ferdensi, Jr., Dr. James W. Stoner, retired Air Force Col. David 

Raspet, and Mr. Charles Tevis. 

The new pioneers will be honored in a ceremony at 1:30 p.m. Sept. 23 at NRO headquarters 

where plaques will be permanently displayed in their honor. They were selected by Under 

Secretary of the Air Force and NRO Director Peter Teets based on recommendations from a 

special selection board, and will join 53 pioneers selected over the past three years. 

Mr. Ferdensi devised algorithms and computer processing techniques in the late 1970s and early 

1980s for foreign instrumentation signals intelligence data. His pioneering work led to dramatic 

improvements in telemetry collection. The accuracy of the data enabled national and military 

decision makers to analyze and make informed decisions about Soviet military capability. His 

career in national reconnaissance began in 1976. 

Dr. Stoner pioneered techniques for near real-time processing of electronic intelligence signals in 

the 1970s. He developed essential algorithms, supervised software engineering, and implemented 

ground station operations to process large volumes of data in support of global military 

operations. His work made possible rapid digital processing and dissemination of data that meet 

critical requirements of military users. His career in national reconnaissance began in 1970. 

Colonel Raspet pioneered advanced methods of integrating spacecraft into launch vehicles and 

provided crucial leadership in the management of national reconnaissance systems. His 

innovative approaches to spacecraft design and integration during the 1970s ensured the 

sustained operation of reconnaissance satellites and the continuous flow of technical intelligence 

to national and military decision makers. His career in national reconnaissance began in 1966. 

Mr. Tevis was a pioneering advocate for space-based signals intelligence collection at the NSA 

in the late 1950s. He advocated using satellites to collect telemetry from foreign strategic 

weapon systems, which resulted in the deployment of several novel space-based signals 

intelligence collection systems. In the late 1960s, Mr. Tevis also was instrumental in founding 

the Defense Special Missile and Astronautics Center that analyzed signals intelligence at a single 

location. This made integrated intelligence available to policymakers. His career in national 

reconnaissance spanned from 1954-1994. 

News media wishing to attend the event must contact the NRO Office of Corporate 

Communications at (703) 808-1015 and must be at the NRO Visitor's Center by 1 p.m. Sept. 23.