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

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
consolidated  balance  sheet and the  consolidated  statement of income filed as
part of the  quarterly  report on form 10-Q and is  qualified in its entirety by
reference to such quarterly report on form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                        0000853102
<NAME>                                       Day Runner, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Jun-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1997
<CASH>                                         9,411
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  36,099
<ALLOWANCES>                                   11,585
<INVENTORY>                                    30,597
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               73,045
<PP&E>                                         21,971
<DEPRECIATION>                                 11,838
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 85,275
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          25,526
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            7
<OTHER-SE>                                     59,666
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   85,275
<SALES>                                        87,526
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               87,526
<CGS>                                          41,658
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  41,658
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               29,743
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (65)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                16,190
<INCOME-TAX>                                    6,314
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             9,876
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    9,876
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.73
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.59
        


</TABLE>
Gareic Jerard HANKSTON, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 17-6213.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 28, 2018.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas for further consideration in light of *Carpenter v. United States,* 585 U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 2206, ---L.E.2d ---- (2018).
# L_2007090EN.01009201.xml

| 30.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 90/92 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 90/92

---

Information relating to the entry into force of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and the People’s Republic of China pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994

The above Agreement (OJ L 154, 8.6.2006, p. 24) has entered into force on 13 April 2006.

---
Timothy RICE, petitioner, v. STATE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION AT WAYMART, et al.

No. 17-5513.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 10, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.1

INTERSTATE LAND INVESTORS II LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Jeffrey K. Harpel, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Interstate Land Investors II Limited Partnership;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly
report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. The registrant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 registrant
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 registrant is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is
being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant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 quarterly report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of
an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of
internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.

/s/ Jeffrey K. HarpelJeffrey K. HarpelSenior Vice President,ISC Realty Corporation,General Partner and Principal Executive Officer,of the RegistrantDate: August 13, 2004
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of American Media Operations, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ended September 29, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David Pecker Chief Executive 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:



(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.



/s/    DAVID PECKERDAVID PECKER Chief Executive OfficerFebruary 17, 2004




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section
906, has been provided to American Media Operations, Inc. and will be retained by American Media Operations, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-10522 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. JOSE ARRIAGA-MORALES, Defendant-Appellant

A ppeal from the United States District Court f or the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:11-CR-293-1

Before KING, CLEMENT, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing t h e j udgment in a crim i n a l case, Jose Arriaga-Morales raises arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. Newson , 515 F.3d 374, 377-78 (5th C ir. 2008), w hich held that the district court may not award an additional one-level reduction under U.S. Sentencing G u i d e lines Manual § 3E1.1(b) absent a motion f rom the Government and that t he Government m ay decline to move for the reduction based on the defendant’s refusal to waive his right to appeal. Accordingly, the Government’s motion f or s ummary affirmance

U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D February 19, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 12-10522 Document: 00512146584 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/19/2013No. 12-10522

is G RANTED, its alternative motion f or a n extension o f t ime t o file a b r i e f is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 12-10522 Document: 00512146584 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/19/2013
Ronald GOODE, aka Black, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6123.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 30, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the use in this Registration Statement on Form 10-SB of our report
on YouthLine USA, Inc. and Subsidiary dated February 22, 2000 on our
examinations for the years ended December 31, 1998 and 1999. We also consent to
the reference to our firm under the caption "Experts".





MICHAEL C. FINKELSTEIN
Morganville, New Jersey
Certified Public Accountant
April 3, 2000
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3785 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3785

    To amend title 28, United States Code, to change the residency 
requirements for certain officials serving in the District of Columbia, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 16, 2019

  Ms. Norton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title 28, United States Code, to change the residency 
requirements for certain officials serving in the District of Columbia, 
                        and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``District of Columbia Federal 
Officials Residency Equality Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN OFFICIALS SERVING IN THE 
              DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

    (a) Circuit Judges.--Section 44(c) of title 28, United States Code, 
is amended--
            (1) by striking ``Except in the District of Columbia, 
        each'' and inserting ``Each'';
            (2) by striking ``his appointment'' and inserting ``his or 
        her appointment''; and
            (3) by striking ``state'' and inserting ``State''.
    (b) District Judges.--Section 134 of title 28, United States Code, 
is amended--
            (1) in the first sentence of subsection (b)--
                    (A) by striking ``the District of Columbia, the 
                Southern District of New York, and'' and inserting 
                ``the Southern District of New York and''; and
                    (B) by striking ``for which he'' and inserting 
                ``for which he or she''; and
            (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``his'' each place it 
        appears and inserting ``his or her''.
    (c) United States Attorneys.--Section 545(a) of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended by striking the first sentence and inserting 
``Each United States attorney shall reside in the district for which he 
or she is appointed, except that those officers of the Southern 
District of New York and the Eastern District of New York may reside 
within 20 miles thereof.''.
    (d) United States Marshals.--Section 561(e)(1) of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
            ``(1) the marshal for the Southern District of New York may 
        reside within 20 miles of the district; and''.
    (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall take 
effect on the date that is one year after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5th Cir. Rule 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 5th Cir. Rule

47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

______________________

No. 98-50486

______________________

CHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALIST 

INTERNAL REVENUE EMPLOYEES;

LEXIE WHITE,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE; DAVID A. MADER,

in his official capacity as Chief Management and Administration,

Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service;

SEAN ROGERS, in his official capacity as Chief Labor Relations, 

Internal Revenue Service,

Defendants-Appellees.

___________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(A-97-CA-639-SS)

___________________________________________________________________

November 5, 1999

Before DUHÉ, BARKSDALE, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges:

PER CURIAM:*

AFFIRMED. See 5th Cir. Rule 47.6.
EXHIBIT 32 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with this yearly report on Form
10-KSB of China Elite Information Co., Ltd. (the Company) for the year ended
November 30, 2008,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Li Kin Shing, President, Chief Executive Officer and 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, to
the best of my knowledge and belief: (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 result of operations of the Company.  Date: March 13, 2009

By
/s/ Li Kin ShingLi Kin ShingPresident, Chief Executive Officerand Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6662

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

ANTONIO LENARD BUEY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, 

Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:10-cr-00062-NCT-1; 1:14-cv00142-NCT-JEP)

Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 6, 2017

Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Antonio Lenard Buey, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Randall Stuart Galyon, OFFICE 

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Antonio Lenard Buey seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order 

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). 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 assessment 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 that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion 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 

Buey has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a 

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket Nos. 41472 & 41473

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

SAMUEL DAVID LAYNE FERRELL,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2014 Unpublished Opinion No. 605

Filed: July 2, 2014

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED 

OPINION AND SHALL NOT 

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Twin 

Falls County. Hon. G. Richard Bevan, District Judge. 

Orders denying I.C.R. 35 motions for reduction of sentences, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Shawn F. Wilkerson, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy 

Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; GRATTON, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

In these consolidated cases, Samuel David Layne Ferrell pled guilty to one count of lewd 

conduct with a minor under sixteen, I.C. § 18-1508, and one count of issuing an insufficient 

funds check, I.C. §§ 18-3106(b) and (f). In exchange for his guilty pleas, an additional charge of 

lewd conduct with a minor under sixteen was dismissed. The district court sentenced Ferrell to a 

unified term of ten years, with a miniumum period of confinement of three years, for lewd 

conduct with a minor under sixteen and a concurrent unified term of three years, with a 

minimum period of confinement of one year, for issuing an insufficient funds check. The district 

court, however, retained jurisdiction and sent Ferrell to participate in the rider program. 

Following completion of Ferrell’s rider, the district court relinquished jurisdiction and ordered 
2

execution of Ferrell’s sentences. Ferrell filed I.C.R 35 motions for reduction of his sentences, 

which the district court denied. Ferrell appeals.

A motion for reduction of sentence under I.C.R. 35 is essentially a plea for leniency, 

addressed to the sound discretion of the court. State v. Knighton, 143 Idaho 318, 319, 144 P.3d 

23, 24 (2006); State v. Allbee, 115 Idaho 845, 846, 771 P.2d 66, 67 (Ct. App. 1989). In 

presenting a Rule 35 motion, the defendant must show that the sentence is excessive in light of 

new or additional information subsequently provided to the district court in support of the 

motion. State v. Huffman, 144 Idaho 201, 203, 159 P.3d 838, 840 (2007). Upon review of the 

record, including the new information submitted with Ferrell’s Rule 35 motions, we conclude no 

abuse of discretion has been shown. Therefore, the district court’s orders denying Ferrell’s 

Rule 35 motions are affirmed.
#### H. S. Eberle and Mrs. A. M. Eberle, joined by her husband and next friend, H. S. Eberle, *Appellants,*v. Marion Wilson, *Appellee.*

Division B.

Opinion filed March 20, 1929.

*385*Leonardy & Leonardy*for Appellants;

*Stewart & Stewart,*for Appellee.

Buford, J.

In this case decree *pro confesso*was entered August 2, 1926. Testimony was taken December 30, 1926. Report of Special Master was filed March 2, 1927. Final decree was entered March 12, 1927. A motion to vacate decree *pro confesso,*the order appointing a Special Master and final decree was filed September 17, 1927, and on that date an order was made vacating the decree *pro confesso*the Order appointing a Special Master and the final decree, from which Order appeal was taken.

It will be observed that the order vacating the final decree and other orders referred to was made more than six (6) months after the entry of the final decree.

It appears that the entry of the decree *pro confesso*was irregular but was not void. It also appears from the record that the final decree was based upon testimony taken after the time was expired and that therefore the entry of this decree was error, but the decree was not void. See Woodward v. Woodward, 95 Fla. 396, 116 So. R. 501.

At the expiration of six months from the date of the entry of the final decree, such decree which had already become absolute, could not then be corrected either by appeal or by order of the Circuit Court. Mabson v. Christ, 119, So. R. 131.

The decree by the passage of time, that is by the passage of a period of more than six months from the date of its entry in the proper court records had passed beyond the control of the Court.

For the reasons stated, orders appealed from should be reversed and it is so ordered.

Reversed.

*386Whitfield, P. J., and Strum, J., concur.

Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.