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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                    1,000
<CURRENCY>                               U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<CASH>                                         12,664
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   3,022
<ALLOWANCES>                                      448
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               42,006
<PP&E>                                          3,801
<DEPRECIATION>                                  1,312
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 54,558
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          25,980
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                          247
<OTHER-SE>                                     28,279
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   28,526
<SALES>                                         2,664
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                2,664
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               21,511
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   36
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              3,158
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (21,854)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (21,854)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (21,854)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.93)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.93)



</TABLE>
* Appellee Darin Dolehanty was never served with process in the district court and is

not participating in this appeal. After examining the appellant’s brief and the record, we

have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Accordingly, the appeal is submitted on

the appellant’s brief and the record. See F ED

. R. A PP

. P. 34(a)(2)(C). 

# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted September 23, 2010 *

Decided October 29, 2010

Before

ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge

TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge

ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge

No. 10

‐ 2113

JAMES A. KOORSEN, JR.,

Plaintiff

‐ Appellant

,

v.

DARIN DOLEHANTY,

Defendant

‐ Appellee

. Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Southern District of Indiana,

Indianapolis Division.

No. 1:10

‐ cv

‐ 151

‐ WTL

‐ DML

William T. Lawrence,

Judge

.

O R D E R

James Koorsen, Jr., brought this civil

‐ rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 after the

State of Indiana charged him with a crime. In his amended complaint he claims that the

trial judge, the only named defendant, is prejudiced as evidenced by several unfavorable

rulings. Koorsen wants the prosecution enjoined plus money damages from the judge. The

district court screened Koorsen’s complaint prior to service, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1No. 10

‐ 2113 Page 2

Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Serv.

, 577 F.3d 816, 819 (7th Cir. 2009), and concluded that

it fails to state a claim. Yet the court dismissed the complaint without prejudice. We agree

that dismissal was appropriate but conclude that it should have been with prejudice.

Koorsen has no way around the doctrine of absolute judicial immunity, which

shields judges from suits for money damages based on actions taken as a judge, including

judicial rulings. See Mireles v. Waco

, 502 U.S. 9, 9 (1991); Smith v. City of Hammond

, 388 F.3d

304, 306

‐ 07 (7th Cir. 2004). Koorsen’s accusations arise from decisions made during his

criminal proceeding—that is, from conduct of a judicial nature—so his claim for damages is

self

‐ defeating. Likewise with his request for an injunction to stop his criminal trial. With

exceptions not applicable here, a federal court may not grant injunctive relief in a suit

brought against a judge for acts taken in his judicial capacity. See Federal Courts

Improvement Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104

‐ 317, § 309(c), 110 Stat. 3847, 3853 (amending 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983); Smith v. City of Hammond

, 388 F.3d 304, 307 (7th Cir. 2004). Because neither avenue

of relief is available to Koorsen, his suit was properly dismissed. A dismissal on these

grounds, however, is a decision on the merits and should have been with prejudice. See

Dawson v. Newman

, 419 F.3d 656, 659

‐ 62 (7th Cir. 2005); Smith

, 388 F.3d at 307

‐ 308.

The dismissal is MODIFIED to be with prejudice and, as modified, is AFFIRMED.
Joe Fidel FLORES, petitioner, v. W.L. MONTGOMERY, Acting Warden.

No. 18-5604.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
**EXHIBIT32**

 

**SECTION 1350CERTIFICATIONS**

 

Each of the undersigned herebycertifies that to his knowledge the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for thefiscal period ended June 30, 2008 of Lincoln Benefit Life Company filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result ofoperations of Lincoln Benefit Life Company.

 

August 8, 2008

 
|   | /s/ James E. Hohmann      |   |
|--------|---------------------------|--------|
|   | James E. Hohmann          |
|   | Chairman of the Board and |
|   | Chief Executive Officer   |
|   |                      |
|   | /s/ John C. Pintozzi      |   |
|   | John C. Pintozzi          |
|   | Senior Vice President and |
|   | Chief Financial Officer   |

 

E-4

----
Manuel CAZARES, petitioner, v. Jay CASSADY, Warden.

No. 18-8914.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1815 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1815

             To rename Mount McKinley in Alaska as Denali.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 13, 1999

 Mr. Young of Alaska introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                     to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
             To rename Mount McKinley in Alaska as Denali.

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

SECTION. 1. RENAMING MT. MCKINLEY AS DENALI.

    Mount McKinley, located in the State of Alaska at 63 degrees 04 
minutes 12 seconds north, by 151 degrees 00 minutes 18 seconds west 
shall hereafter be named, referred to, and known for all purposes as 
Denali. All references in law and regulation, and all references on any 
map, to ``Mt. McKinley'' or ``Mount McKinley'' shall hereafter be 
treated as references to ``Denali''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                             409
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  105,581
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,665
<INVENTORY>                                    106,598
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               218,742
<PP&E>                                         336,663
<DEPRECIATION>                                 158,927
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 480,443
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           63,743
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           262
<OTHER-SE>                                     220,016
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   480,443
<SALES>                                        551,008
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               551,008
<CGS>                                          416,427
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  416,427
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                74,682
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,780
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 54,119
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,971
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             33,148
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    33,148
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.27
        

</TABLE>
George JENEWICZ, petitioner, v. NEW JERSEY.

No. 18-5581.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 15, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division denied.
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeals of

- ) ) Pensacola Bay Support Services, LLC ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ASBCA Nos. 62813

- ADR, 63067

- ADR 63068

- ADR , 63118

- ADR 63119

- ADR , 63120

- ADR 63121

- ADR , 63122

- ADR 63123

- ADR , 63124

- ADR 63125

- ADR , 63126

- ADR 63127

- ADR , 63128

- ADR 63129

- ADR , 63130

- ADR 63131

- ADR , 63132

- ADR 63133

- ADR , 63134

- ADR 63135

- ADR , 63136

- ADR 63137

- ADR , 63138

- ADR 63139

- ADR , 63140

- ADR ) Under Contract No. N69450

- 18

- D

- 2013 )
APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: J. Alex Ward, Esq. R. Locke Bell, Esq. Lyle F. Hedgecock, Esq. Roke Iko, Esq.

Morrison & Foerster LLP Washington, DC Michael A. Richard, Esq.

IAP Worldwide Services, Inc. Cape Canaveral , FL
APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Craig D. Jensen, Esq. Navy Chief Trial Attorney Patricia W. Walter, Esq. Jerry Kim, Esq. Russell A. Shultis, Esq.

Trial Attorneys
OPINION BY ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE PAGE
As the result of a successful Board

- facilitated mediation conducted July 24

- 28, 2023, the parties have resolved their dispute. By motion dated August 8, 2023, they request that the Board enter judgment in favor of appellant in the captioned appeals.2 It is the Board’s decision, pursuant to 41 U.S.C. §§ 7105(e), 7108(b), and the parties’ stipulation and agre ement, that the appeal is sustained. In the nature of a consent judgment, the Board makes a monetary award to appellant in the amount of $5,000,000. Interest shall be paid on this amount pursuant to 41 U.S.C. § 7109 beginning 121 days after the date of t his judgment until the date of payment.
Dated: August 10 , 2023

R EBA PAGE Administrative Judge Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals

I concur

RICHARD SHACKLEFORD Administrative Judge Acting Chairman Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals I concur

OWEN C. WILSON Administrative Judge Vice Chairman Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Opinion and Decision of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA Nos. 62813

- ADR, 63067

- ADR, 63068

- ADR, 63118

- ADR, 63119

- ADR, 63120

- ADR, 63121

- ADR, 63122

- ADR, 63123

- ADR, 63124

- ADR, 63125

- ADR, 63126

- ADR, 63127

- ADR, 63128

- ADR, 63129

- ADR, 63130

- ADR, 63131

- ADR, 63132

- ADR, 63133

- ADR, 63134

- ADR, 63135

- ADR, 63136

- ADR, 63137

- ADR, 63138

- ADR, 63139

- ADR, 63140

- ADR , Appeal of Pensacola Bay Support Services, LLC , rendered in conformance with the Board ’ s Charter.
Dated: August 10, 2023

PAULLA K. GATES

- LEWIS Recorder, Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals
Desha COOPER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8844.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  7
<MULTIPLIER>    1
       
<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                       JUN-30-1997
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                                 8,880,174
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                        0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                          0
<EQUITIES>                                                   0
<MORTGAGE>                                                   0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                                0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                       8,880,174
<CASH>                                                 988,718
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                           0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                                 980,582
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      12,969,152
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                              0
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                          0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                               0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                1,730,584   
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                               557,984
<OTHER-SE>                                                   0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        12,969,152 
<PREMIUMS>                                             646,195 
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                                    284,551 
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                           0
<OTHER-INCOME>                                         (36,858)
<BENEFITS>                                                   0
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                            192,393
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                                         0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        (76,756)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            79,200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   (155,956)
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                          (155,956)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            (.028)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            (.028)
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                         379,920
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                    181,692
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                            0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                           0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                             0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                        561,612
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                                      0
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| 1. | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,                and |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial conditions and results of operations of                Registrant. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                              |                                |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|
|   |                                              | /s/ Leliang              Zhang |
|   | Name:              Leliang Zhang                  |
|   | Title:              Chief Financial Officer  |

----
Alla OPENGEYM, petitioner, v. HEARTLAND EMPLOYMENT SERVICES, LLC.

No. 18-5537.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied. Petitioner allowed until October 22, 2018, within which *309to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
Exhibit 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 Annual Report of Cypress International, Inc.(the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending October 31, 2001 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Robert L. Card, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 result of operations of
          the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
12th day of May 2003.


/s/ Robert L. Card
---------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 Certification of CEO Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (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/ JOHN E. JACKSONName:
    
    John E. JacksonTitle:
    
    Chief Executive OfficerDate:
    
    May 3, 2006
(LOGO)ARTHUR ANDERSEN

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To GE Capital Loan Services, Inc.

We have  examined  management's  accompanying  assertion  about GE Capital  Loan
Services,  Inc.'s  (GECLS)  compliance  with  the  minimum  servicing  standards
identified  in the Mortgage  Bankers  Association  of America's  Uniform  Single
Attestation  Program for  Mortgage  Bankers  (USAP) as of and for the year ended
December 31, 1999, in relation to its servicing of  multifamily  and  commercial
mortgage  loans and that  GECLS had in effect a  fidelity  bond and  errors  and
omissions  policy in the amount of  $550,000,000  as of December 31,  1999.  Our
examination included all third-party loan portfolios.  Management is responsible
for GECLS's  compliance  with those  servicing  standards and for  maintaining a
fidelity bond and errors and omissions policy.  Our responsibility is to express
an opinion on management's assertion based on our examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on a test basis,  evidence about GECLS's compliance with the minimum
servicing  standards  and  performing  such other  procedures  as we  considered
necessary  in the  circumstances.  We believe  that our  examination  provides a
reasonable  basis for our  opinion.  Our  examination  does not  provide a legal
determination on GECLS's compliance with the minimum servicing standards.

In our opinion,  management's  accompanying assertion that GECLS complied in all
material respects with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards and had in
effect a  fidelity  bond and  errors  and  omissions  policy  in the  amount  of
$550,000,000  as of  December  31,  1999,  is  fairly  stated,  in all  material
respects.

Arthur Andersen LLP


Houston, Texas
January 14, 2000
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 01/25/11                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      562,738
COMMITMENTS
  52,244   11,904  115,019  369,038  418,111  536,301  545,034   26,437   17,704

CHANGES FROM 01/18/11 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:    -18,614)
  -7,674   -8,804  -10,036   -5,029   -2,358  -22,739  -21,198    4,125    2,584

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     9.3      2.1     20.4     65.6     74.3     95.3     96.9      4.7      3.1

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      123)
      31       18       41       63       65      112      109
```

----

Updated January 28, 2011
Leonard E. DUNNING, petitioner, v. Nancy M. WARE, Director, Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency.

No. 18-5713.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 9, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 14

- 00474

- CR

Maria Angeles Valentin

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 89th District Court

o f Wichita County (54,418

- C )

September 10, 2015

Opinion by Justice Meier

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirm ed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Bill Meier

Justice Bill Meier
Martin JONASSEN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES, et al.

No. 18-6223.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 3, 2018.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals of the Ninth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See *Martin v.*

*605*District of Columbia Court of Appeals,*506 U.S. 1, 113 S.Ct. 397, 121 L.Ed.2d 305 (1992) (*per curiam* ).