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 OF THE MAXIM GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES AS OF APRIL
30, 1997 AND THE RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CASH FLOWS FOR
THE QUARTERS ENDED APRIL 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1997
<CASH>                                           4,400
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   57,422
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,474
<INVENTORY>                                     44,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               110,724
<PP&E>                                         142,101
<DEPRECIATION>                                  39,500
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 228,438
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           45,387
<BONDS>                                         57,578
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            16
<OTHER-SE>                                      (8,944)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   228,438
<SALES>                                         86,225
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                86,225
<CGS>                                           59,155
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   59,155
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                20,438
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   125
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,401
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,360
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,109
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,251
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,251
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .20
        

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

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED December 31, 1998 AND
AS OF December 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                    0000911317
<NAME> LAS VEGAS AIRLINES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                    1
<CURRENCY>                      US dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Sep-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 Oct-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         4,727
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               4,727
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 546,727
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          992,929
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       3,957
<OTHER-SE>                                     (450,159)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   546,727
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  255,598
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (255,598)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (255,598)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (638,758)
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (945,356)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.24)


</TABLE>
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

4/4/23

Eastern District of Texas

GS HOLISTIC, LLC

4:23-cv-00289

M2M SQUARED LLC d/b/a VAPE CAVE and JOHN

DOE,

JOHN DOE

6958 MAIN St #200

FRISCO, TX 75033

Sanjay K. Minocha, Esquire

Minocha Law Firm

3300 Oak Lawn Avenue

Suite 700

Dallas, Texas 75219

Case 4:23-cv-00289-ALM Document 4 Filed 04/04/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 20
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

u I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

u I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

u Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

4:23-cv-00289

0.00

Case 4:23-cv-00289-ALM Document 4 Filed 04/04/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 21
`DTCC Repo-US Treasury <30 YR - NYSE LIFFE - NYPC                     Code-045L2T
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 08/07/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF $5,000,000)                            OPEN INTEREST:       14,803
COMMITMENTS
     913    6,022      863   12,784    7,860   14,560   14,745      243       58

CHANGES FROM 07/31/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:          .)
       .        .        .        .        .        .        .        .        .

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     6.2     40.7      5.8     86.4     53.1     98.4     99.6      1.6      0.4

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       22)
       5        4        3       12       11       18       17`

---

Updated August 10, 2012
<page>


32.1     Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
         Officer of ECONOMETRICS, INC. pursuant to Section 906 of the
         Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002


                            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 on Form 10-Q of ECONOMETRICS, INC. (the
"Company") for the quarter ended August 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned
Michael Anthony, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
ECONOMETRICS, INC., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: October 7, 2008

                                      /s/Michael Anthony
                                      ----------------------
                                      Michael Anthony
                                      Chief Executive Officer

                                      /s/ Michael Anthony
                                      ----------------------
                                      Michael Anthony
                                      Chief Financial Officer
Hugo PLIEGO-HERNANDEZ, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6100.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 29, 2018.

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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000917823
<NAME>                        PROPHET 21, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Jun-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jul-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   Jun-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        36,403
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               36,403
<CGS>                                          19,476
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  19,476
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               13,741
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (376)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                3,562
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,275
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   2,287
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .60
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .60


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

TOUCHPOINT PROJECTION § 

INNOVATIONS, LLC § 

§ 

Plaintiff, § 

 § 

v. § Civil Action No. 2:23-cv-0233-JRG 

 § 

CDNETWORKS CO., LTD, § 

 § 

Defendant. § 

ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S OPPOSED MOTION 

TO STRIKE DOCUMENT NO. 13 ENTITLED RESPONSE IN 

SUPPORT OF CDNETWORKS’ MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT (DKT. 10) 

The Court has considered Defendant’s Opposed Motion to Strike Document No. 13 

Entitled Response in Support of CDNetworks’ Motion to Set Aside Default (Dkt. 10) (“Motion”). 

After considering the Motion and any Response thereto, the Court has determined that the Motion 

should, in all things, be GRANTED. Therefore, it is ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. 

It is further ORDERED that Document No. 13 entitled Response in Support of CDNetworks’ 

Motion to Set Aside Default (Dkt. 10) is hereby stricken from the record. 

Case 2:23-cv-00233-JRG Document 14-2 Filed 08/12/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 137
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MARTHA L. WARD,

Appellant,

v.

HSBC BANK USA, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR THE REGISTERED 

HOLDERS OF RENAISSANCE HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 2006-1,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-890 

[July 29, 2021]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. 

Lucie County; Elizabeth A. Metzger, Judge; L.T. Case No. 56-2018-CA000691.

Kendrick Almaguer, Connor Furlong and Shaina Van Mehren of The 

Ticktin Law Group, Deerfield Beach, for appellant.

Kimberly S. Mello and Arda Goker of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Orlando, 

for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

DAMOORGIAN, KUNTZ, JJ., and FAHNESTOCK, FABIENNE E., Associate Judge, 

concur. 

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
AO 458 (Rev. 06/09) Appearance of Counsel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Case No.

Defendant

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

.

Date:

Attorney’s signature

Printed name and bar number

Address

E-mail address

Telephone number

FAX number

Eastern District of Texas XR Communications, LLC, dba Vivato Technologies Verizon Communications, Inc., et al. 2:23-cv-00203-JRG-RSP XR Communications, LLC, dba Vivato Technologies 05/24/2023 /s/ Paul A. Kroeger Paul A. Kroeger (CA SBN 229074)

Russ August & Kabat 

12424 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor 

Los Angeles, CA 90025 

pkroeger@raklaw.com (310) 826-7474 (310) 826-6991 Print Save As... Reset

Case 2:23-cv-00203-JRG-RSP Document 15 Filed 05/24/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 862
Jeffrey Joseph PENDLETON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6303.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 13, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Annual Report of TALX Corporation (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ending March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William W. Canfield,
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the
best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

                                 By :  /s/ William W. Canfield
                                       --------------------------------------
                                 William W. Canfield
                                 Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
                                 TALX Corporation
                                 May 31, 2006
Abdul Hakiym ISMAIYL, petitioner, v. Fatimah D. BROWN, et al.

No. 18-5476.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 9, 2018.

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This scheudle contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's consolidated balance sheet and consolidated statement of operations
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such consolidated financial
statements together with the related footnotes thereto.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                            3111
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      510
<ALLOWANCES>                                       283
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  6236
<PP&E>                                           25833
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   32069
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             4563
<BONDS>                                          30107
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      (4010)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     32069
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  4534
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     5109
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1592
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2100)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2100)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2100)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

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

**No. 13**  **- 8009** 

ALEJANDRO HERNANDEZ , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria
. Claude M. Hilton , Senior District Judge. ( 1:13

- cv - 00925

- CMH

- TRJ; 1:91

- cr - 00139

- CMH

- 3 )

Submitted : February 27 , 2014 Decided: March 5 , 2014

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Alejandro Dejesus Hernandez, Appellant Pro Se. Bernard James Apperson, III, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Alejandro Hernandez seeks to appeal the district court’s order construing his pleading as a successive 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 ( 2012 ) motion, and dismissing it on that basis. We find no error in the court’s decision to construe the pleading as a
§ 2255 motion. The court’s 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 co nstitutional 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 cla ims 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 procedura l 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 Hernandez has not made the requisite showing. Accordingl y, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.3 Additionally, we construe Hernandez’s notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or successive § 2255 motion. United States v. Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims based on either: (1) newly discovered evidence that
. . . would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable f actfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense; or (2) a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court , that was previously unavailable
. 28 U.S.C. § 22 55(h ) (2012)
. Hernandez ’s claims do not satisfy either of these criteria. Therefore, we deny authorization to fi le a successive § 2255 motion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument woul d not aid the decisional
process.

DISMISSED