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

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary information extracted from the Form 10-Q and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001000050
<NAME> LENOX BANCORP, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                              0
<ALLOWANCE>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<DEPOSITS>                                           0
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                  0
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                       0
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                      0
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                    0
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                     0
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                                0
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### Kiki Turino Hancoch RUNTU, Petitioner, v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

No. 07-10041

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

June 20, 2007.

H. Glenn Fogle, Jr., Leslie A. Diaz, The Fogle Law Firm, LLC, Atlanta, GA, for Petitioner.

*940David V. Bernal, Office of Immigration Litigation, Nancy E. Friedman, Colette J. Winston, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before BLACK, CARNES and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Under 8 C.F.R. 208.16(b)(2), an immigrant seeking a withholding of removal need not provide evidence that he would be singled out individually for persecution if he establishes: (1) that there is a pattern or practice in his home country of persecution of a group of persons similarly situated to the applicant on account of religion, and (2) his inclusion in such a group of persons will make it more likely than not that his or her life or freedom would be threatened upon return to that country. *Id.*

The Board of Immigration Appeals denied Kiki Turino Hancoch Runtu’s request for asylum because Runtu failed to demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances or changed country conditions justified his untimely filing. We do not have jurisdiction to review that determination. *Chacon-Botero v. U.S. Atty. Gen.,*427 F.3d 954, 957 (11th Cir.2005). The BIA rejected Runtu’s request for withholding because the Immigration Judge found that his testimony of past persecution was not credible. The determination that Runtu was not a credible witness is supported by substantial evidence. *See Forgue v. United States Att’y Gen.,*401 F.3d 1282, 1286 (11th Cir.2005).

However, neither the BIA nor the IJ addressed Runtu’s alternative argument, which he claims is supported by various institutional reports and news articles, that there is a pattern or practice in Indonesia of persecuting Christians. Runtu’s credibility is not relevant to the question of whether the information contained in those reports is accurate or sufficient to satisfy the high burden of demonstrating that a Christian is more likely than not to face persecution on return to Indonesia. For that reason, we grant Runtu’s petition for review with respect to the withholding of removal claim based on a pattern or practice of persecution. On remand, the BIA should address the limited question of whether Runtu has satisfied the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 208.16(b)(2)(i)-(ii).

PETITION DISMISSED IN PART, DENIED IN PART, GRANTED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PAUL JULIAN MANEY, 6:15-CV-00259-JE 

Petitioner, ORDER 

v. 

ROB PERSSON, 

Respondent. 

BROWN, Judge. 

On November 21, 2016, Magistrate Judge John Jelderks issued 

an Order (#57) denying Petitioner Paul Julian Maney's Motion 

(#48) for Discovery. Petitioner filed Objections to the Order. 

The matter is now before this Court pursuant to Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 72(a). 

In accordance with Rule 72(a), "[w]hen a pretrial matter not 

dispositive of a party's claim or defense is referred to a 

magistrate judge to hear and decide, the magistrate judge must 

promptly conduct the required proceedings and, when appropriate, 

issue a written order stating the decision." The standard of 

1 - ORDER 

Case 6:15-cv-00259-JE Document 62 Filed 01/24/17 Page 1 of 2
review for an order with objections is ''clearly erroneous'' or 

"contrary to law." See also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (1) (A) (applying 

the "clearly erroneous or contrary to law" standard of review for 

nondispositive motions). If a ruling on a motion is not 

determinative of "a party's claim or defense," it is not 

dispositive and, therefore, is not subject to the de nova review 

that is required for proposed findings and recommendations that 

address dispositive motions. See Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (1) (B). 

This Court has carefully considered Petitioner's Objections 

and concludes they do not provide a basis to modify the 

Magistrate Judge's Order. This Court also has reviewed the 

pertinent portions of the record de nova and does not find any 

error. 

CONCLUSION 

The Court AFFIRMS Magistrate Judge Jelderks's Order (#57) 

denying Petitioner's Motion (#48) for Discovery. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED this ;L8'1' day of January, 2017. 

?..:::.".:} 

AN~~ United States District Judge 

2 - ORDER 

Case 6:15-cv-00259-JE Document 62 Filed 01/24/17 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF REALMARK PROPERTY INVESTORS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP VI-A FOR
TWELVE  MONTHS  ENDED  DECEMBER  31,  1996,  AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   50,337
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               227,615
<PP&E>                                      19,832,797
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,289,574
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,139,125
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,003,303
<BONDS>                                      9,573,161
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,139,125
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,039,286
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,860,288
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               165,190
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             933,693
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (986,192)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (986,192)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (6.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
Case 6:14-cv-02019-MA Document 31 Filed 04/29/16 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-2518
MICHAEL B. DAVIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARVIN RUNYON, Postmaster General, U.S. Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-96-40-L) Submitted: February 12, 1998 Decided: February 24, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael B. Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Alice Lu cille Covington, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Washington, D.C.; Alonzo Harrison Long, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant appeals the district court's order granting Appellee's motion for summary judgment. We have reviewed the record andthe district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court and deny Appellant's motion to authorize a transcript at the government's expense. Davis v. Runyon , No. CA-96-40-L (W.D. Va. Oct. 6, 1997).We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# EUR-Lex - 52006AP0580 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52006AP0580

**European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing for the period 2007-2013 the specific programme "Civil justice" as part of the General programme "Fundamental Rights and Justice" (COM(2005)0122 - C6-0096/2005 - 2005/0040(COD)) **

*
Official Journal 317 E , 23/12/2006 P. 0612 - 0612 *

20061223

P6_TA(2006)0580

Civil justice (2007-2013) ***I

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing for the period 2007-2013 the specific programme "Civil justice" as part of the General programme "Fundamental Rights and Justice" (COM(2005)0122 — C6-0096/2005 — 2005/0040(COD))

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2005)0122) [1],

- having regard to Article 251(2) and Articles 61(c) and 67(2) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0096/2005),

- having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A6-0452/2006);

1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

[1] Not yet published in OJ.

--------------------------------------------------
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Rangeland Resources & Systems Research: Fort Collins, CO
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Areas of Research
                        CARM
                                    PHACE
                                    Thunder Basin
                                    Modeling
                                    WindSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications

Rangeheadline bar Past Scientist Publications
               RRRU Photo Herbarium
               Prairie Heating and CO2 Enrichment (PHACE) Experiment
               Remote Sensing
               Misc pages
               Thunder Basin Grassland
               Adaptive Grazing Management
               Cheatgrass Target Grazing


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
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 Kentucky Bancshares, Inc.
(the ?Company?) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
?Report?), the undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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:      November 12, 2010        By  /s/ Louis Prichard
                                    Louis Prichard
                                    President & Chief Executive Officer

Date:      November 12, 2010        By  /s/ Gregory J. Dawson
                                    Gregory J. Dawson
                                    Chief Financial Officer



35
Lexlibrary/197885.1
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Linda Y. Brown, Respondent, v Grandview Florist et al., Appellants. Workers’ Compensation Board, Respondent.

— Levine, J.

On January 17, 1978, claimant, walking en route from her place of employment to a nearby parking lot where her car was parked, fell in an icy alleyway. After substantial lapse of time, she filed a compensation claim which was indexed January 30, 1980 by the Workers’ Compensation Board. The actual date of filing was not ascertained, because the record therein is located among files sealed or destroyed within the State Office Building in the City of Binghamton, Broome County, which was contaminated by PCBs. The claim was initially controverted on grounds of absence of accident, notice and causal relationship. At some point in the proceedings before the Hearing Officer, however, the carrier also defended on the basis of the filing of the claim beyond the two-year statutory limit (Workers’ Compensation Law §28). The Hearing Officer denied the claim based upon a finding of no accident. Claimant applied to the Board for review, which subsequently reversed and remitted for further development of the record on the question of causally related disability. The Board found that claimant sustained an accident arising *314out of and in the course of employment and excused claimant’s failure to have given timely written notice *(see,*Workers’ Compensation Law § 18) on the ground that the employer had prompt actual knowledge of the accident and, accordingly, was not prejudiced by late written notice *(see, supra).*

On this appeal, the employer and carrier have restricted their arguments for reversal to issues relating to claimant’s failure to timely comply with statutory notice and filing requirements. The employer’s testimony at the hearing and initial report of injury amply support the Board’s finding of timely actual notice. This, alone, afforded the Board a basis for exercising its discretion to excuse the delay in giving written notice under the circumstances presented here and without reference to the sufficiency of the evidence on the issue of prejudice *(see, Matter of Teague v Rockville Reconditioning Center,*61 AD2d 874; *see also, Matter of Clemens v Allegheny Ludlum Steel Corp.,*25 AD2d 899, 900, *lv denied*18 NY2d 578).

The question of timely filing was not raised before the Board, although the employer and the carrier had opportunity to do so and did in fact object to the absence of timely notice. Consequently, this issue is not properly before this court on appeal *(see, Matter of Leary v Ward Baking Co.,*63 AD2d 1065; *Matter of Benson v Grey Adv. Agency,*15 AD2d 701, 702).

Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workers’ Compensation Board. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Weiss, Mikoll and Levine, JJ., concur.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Beltsville Agricultural Research Center: Beltsville, MD
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    USDA Civil Rights Policy StatementSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home People & Locations







Robert L Chilcoate
                        Facilities Division

                        




                        
                        Maintenance Worker
                        Phone: (301) 504-9385
                        
                        
                        Fax: (301) 504-5501(Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 El Reno, Oklahoma
 close




            Search small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home People & Locations







Alisha N Preno
                        Location Support Staff

                        




                        
                        Veterinary Medical Officer
                        Phone: (405) 262-5291
                        
                        
                        Fax: (405) 262-0133(Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov