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 sheets and statements of operations for Telos  Corporation
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000320121
<NAME>                        Telos Corporation
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         315,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               25,860,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   830,000
<INVENTORY>                                  4,779,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            37,009,000
<PP&E>                                      35,329,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              23,093,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              56,886,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       30,041,000
<BONDS>                                     25,045,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       43,029,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        78,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 (52,669,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                56,886,000
<SALES>                                    171,364,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           171,364,000
<CGS>                                      151,216,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              151,216,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               400,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           6,065,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (17,832,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                (7,853,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (9,979,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             (8,015,000)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,964,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0





</TABLE>
#### INSURANCE CO. v. CONSTRUCTION CO.

No. 261 PC

Case below: 46 NC App 427

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 15 August 1980.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5449 

To amend section 310 of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009 to 

extend the period of time during which claims for retroactive stoploss special pay may be submitted. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 27, 2010 

Ms. SUTTON (for herself, Mr. JONES, Mr. HARE, Mr. WALZ, Ms. KILROY, Mr. 

COURTNEY, and Mr. BOCCIERI) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend section 310 of the Supplemental Appropriations 

Act, 2009 to extend the period of time during which 

claims for retroactive stop-loss special pay may be submitted. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. TIME PERIOD FOR SUBMISSION OF CLAIMS 

4 FOR RETROACTIVE STOP-LOSS SPECIAL PAY. 

5 (a) EXTENSION.—Section 310(b) of the Supple6 mental Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111–32; 

7 123 Stat. 1871) is amended by striking ‘‘1 year’’ both 

8 places it appears and inserting ‘‘2 years’’. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5449 IH

1 (b) PLAN FOR IMPROVED DOD INFORMATION DIS2 SEMINATION EFFORTS.— 

3 (1) PLAN REQUIRED.—As part of the report re4 quired by subsection (h) of section 310 of the Sup5 plemental Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 

6 111–32; 123 Stat. 1871), the Secretary of Defense 

7 shall include a plan describing Department of De8 fense outreach and informational efforts to promote 

9 and increase awareness of the retroactive availability 

10 stop-loss special pay under such section. The plan 

11 shall include a timeline for full implementation of 

12 the plan. 

13 (2) SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS.—In developing 

14 the plan, the Secretary of Defense shall consider, at 

15 a minimum, the following: 

16 (A) Previous Department of Defense out17 reach and informational efforts and how these 

18 efforts will be expanded and improved to make 

19 eligible members of the Armed Forces and vet20 erans aware of the availability of retroactive 

21 stop-loss payments. 

22 (B) Department of Defense efforts to co23 ordinate with the Department of Veterans Af24 fairs, veteran service organizations, and other 

25 pertinent veteran groups to increase and imVerDate Mar 15 2010 06:08 May 29, 2010 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H5449.IH H5449

smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5449 IH

1 prove outreach and awareness of the availability 

2 of retroactive stop-loss payments. 

3 (C) Contacting members of the Armed 

4 Forces who have transferred to the Individual 

5 Ready Reserve since September 11, 2001, as a 

6 way of increasing awareness of the availability 

7 of retroactive stop-loss payments. 

8 (3) EXPLANATION.—In the report referred to in 

9 paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense shall de10 scribe how the Secretary addressed each of the spe11 cial considerations specified in paragraph (2). If the 

12 decision is made not to fully implement one or more 

13 of the special considerations, the Secretary shall ex14 plain why that decision was made. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-3 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 1 of 4 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 3 Filed 11/21/2006 Page 1 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-3 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 2 of 4 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 3 Filed 11/21/2006 Page 2 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-3 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 3 of 4 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 3 Filed 11/21/2006 Page 3 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-3 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 4 of 4 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 3 Filed 11/21/2006 Page 4 of 4
#### JONES v. INSURANCE CO.

No. 53 PC.

Case below: 5 N.C. App. 570.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 16 October 1969.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-4590
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TIMOTHY J. LYNCH, Defendant- Appellant.

No. 07-4609
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TIMOTHY J. LYNCH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:06-cr-00454-REP; 3:03-cr-00115-REP) Submitted: February 27, 2008 Decided: March 5, 2008- 2 - Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael S. Nachmanoff, Federal Public Defender, Mary E. Maguire, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Chuck Rosenberg, United States Attorney, Stephen W. Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 3 - PER CURIAM: Timothy J. Lynch pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute heroin within 1000 feet of a public school. In his plea agreement, he reserved the right to challenge the denial of his motion to suppress. In appeal No. 07-4590, Lynch challenges his conviction, asserting that the district court clearly erred in determining that the officers had reasonable suspicion to believe that he was involved in criminal activity and that he might bearmed. In appeal No. 07-4609, Lynch appeals from the twenty-fourmonth prison term the district court imposed after revoking the supervised release term he was serving at the time of his unlawful possession of heroin. He requests that this court remand the supervised release case for resentencing if we find that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress. We have carefully considered the arguments of counsel and the evidence presented to the district court, and we conclude that the district court did not clearly err. United States v. Rusher , 966 F.2d 868, 873 (4th Cir. 1992) (providing standard of review). Thus, we affirm the denial of the motion to suppress for the reasons stated by the district court. Accordingly, Lynch’s conviction and the order on revocation of supervised release are also affirmed. We dispense with oral argument because the facts- 4 - and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32.1





KINDER MORGAN, INC.

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 Kinder Morgan, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies 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.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Kinder Morgan, Inc. and will be retained by Kinder Morgan, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





|                      |  |                                                       
|--------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------
|Dated:  May
	10, 2006 |  | /s/ Richard D. Kinder                                 
|                      |  | Richard D. Kinder
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Case 1:07-cv-03340-RJH Document 7 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03340-RJH Document 7 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### DAVIS v. CAHOON

No. 8 PC.

Case below: 5 N.C. App. 46.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 29 August 1969.
#### Valezca Yaneth FUENTES FLORES, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES,* Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 03-72584, [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 4, 2005.**

Decided April 11, 2005.

Valezca Yaneth Fuentes Flores, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.

Regional Counsel, Western Region, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San *871Francisco, CA, Isaac R. Campbell, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before KOZINSKI, HAWKINS, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

*

 Alberto Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

**

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM***

Valezca Yaneth Fuentes Flores, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of her appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of her application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Fuentes Flores failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution based on her two encounters with members of a guerilla group because forced recruitment by guerillas, without more, does not amount to persecution. *See INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 481-82, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). Because Fuentes Flores did not qualify for asylum, she necessarily failed to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *See Alvarez-Santos v. INS,*332 F.3d 1245, 1255 (9th Cir.2003).

The voluntary departure period was stayed, and that stay will expire upon issuanee of the mandate. *See Desta v. Ashcroft,*365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir.2004).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### NATHAN BROWN, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS EXPERT SERVICE GARAGE, RESPONDENT, v. MACK INTERNATIONAL MOTOR TRUCK CORPORATION, PROSECUTOR.

Submitted May 13, 1932

Decided September 17, 1932.

Before Justices Parker, Campbell and Lloyd.

*1036Por the prosecutor, *Richard M. Glassner*and *Jacob 8. Glichenhaus.*

Por the respondent, *Harry Levin.*

Pek Cukiam.

The Mack Truck Corporation issued a writ of replevin to recover possession of a truck from Nathan Brown, and in the writ demanded that Brown commence an action and file a state of demand showing the amount claimed by him. Brown filed a paper styled state of demand claiming a lien on the truck for supplies as set forth in a schedule annexed, totalling $519.13, and waiving claim for the excess above $500.

This being done, the court made an order reciting that the writ was issued in accordance with the Garage Keepers Lien act and directing trial of the case. Notice of a motion was then made by the Mack corporation to strike out the state of demand, counsel for the company styling himself attorney for the defendant as though a suit by the garage keeper. By agreement the case as thus styled was set down for trial. To the writ the court returns that plaintiff (Brown) took possession of the truck and Mack replevied under the Lien act, filing a bond and retaking the truck; recites the filing of the state of demand, the motion to strike it out as being too late (which was denied), and refers to the stenographic transcript for the disposition of other points.

Prom these it appears that there was a long discussion between court and counsel in which the judge said what he thought and counsel said what they thought, at the end of which, without motion of any sort or tender of proof or failure to tender proof, the judge nonsuited the plaintiff. Who the plaintiff is or was would appear by the original writ to be the Mack corporation and by the stjde of the case from there on it would appear to be Brown. The former, however, accepts the position that it was the Mack company that was nonsuited and has this writ to review.

The nonsuit was wrong. The lienor has the affirmative. But, regardless of where the burden of proof may lie, the *1037judge nonsuited without affording either party opportunity to offer proofs; simply declaring that he could not try the title of the Mack corporation. This was error. *Melier*v. *Fageol Co.,*9 *N. J. Mis. R.*37; 152 *Atl. Rep.*642. The case will go back for a proper trial with opportunity afforded counsel to present their evidence on all phases of the case.

The judgment is reversed, with direction to proceed in accordance with this opinion.
# Soldier Accounted for from WWII (Coy, J.)

/ Published Feb. 12, 2024
WASHINGTON, 
The Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) announced today that U.S. Army Air Force Staff Sgt. Jack W. Coy, 20, of Toledo, Ohio, killed during World War II, was accounted for Sept. 20, 2023.

In early 1944, Coy was assigned to the 703rd Bombardment Squadron, 445th Bombardment Group, 8th Air Force in the European Theater. On Feb 24, Coy, a tail gunner onboard a B-24J “Liberator”, was killed in action when his plane was hit by heavy anti-aircraft fire over Gotha, Germany. One of the surviving crewmembers reported seeing the plane on fire and in a steep dive, before eventually exploding on the ground. While two crewmembers survived, the others, including Coy, were killed in the incident. German forces garrisoned in the area documented the crash site north of Leimbach Bahnhof, near Bad Salzungen, Germany. After the crash, German troops recovered the remains of the ball turret gunner and buried them in a local cemetery. The other six crewmembers, including Coy, were unaccounted for following the war.

In March 1952, the American Graves Registration Command (AGRC), the organization that searched for and recovered fallen American personnel in the European Theater, took custody of comingled unidentified remains recovered from Bad Salzungen Cemetery. These remains, X-9093 Griesheim Mausoleum (X-9093), X-9094 Griesheim Mausoleum (X-9094), and X-9095 Griesheim Mausoleum (X-9095), were believed to be those belonging to Staff Sgt. Coy’s downed aircraft. At the time, identification of these remains was not possible, and they were interred in the Ardennes America Cemetery, Belgium.

In June 2021, DPAA historians and American Battle Monuments Commission personnel, exhumed X-9093, X-9094, and X-9095 from Ardennes American Cemetery and transferred them to the DPAA Laboratory for analysis and identification.

To identify Coy’s remains, scientists from DPAA used anthropological analysis. Additionally, scientists from the Armed Forces Medical Examiner System used mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) analysis.

Coy’s name is recorded on the Tablets of the Missing at Henri-Chapelle American Cemetery, Hombourg, Belgium, along with others still missing from WWII. A rosette will be placed next to his name to indicate he has been accounted for.

SSgt. Coy will be buried in Oregon, Ohio, on a date to be determined.

For family and funeral information, contact the Army Casualty Office at (800) 892-2490.

For additional information on the Defense Department’s mission to account for Americans who went missing while serving our country, visit the DPAA website at www.dpaa.mil or find us on social media at www.facebook.com/dodpaa or https://www.linkedin.com/company/defense-pow-mia-accounting-agency.

Coy’s personnel profile can be viewed at https://dpaa-mil.sites.crmforce.mil/dpaaProfile?id=a0Jt0000000XggREAS.
EXHIBIT 31.2
                           SECTION 302 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Scott Thompson, certify that:

1. I have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report  on  form  10-QSB  of The  X-Change
Corporation,

2.Based on my knowledge,  this 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 report.

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

4.The small business  issuer's other  certifying  officers 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 small business issuer 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 small  business  issuer,  including  its
consolidated subsidiaries,  is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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 report on such evaluation; and

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

5.The small business  issuer's other  certifying  officers and I have disclosed,
based  on  our  most  recent  evaluation  of  internal  control  over  financial
reporting,  to the small business  issuer's  auditors and the audit committee of
small business issuer'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 small  business  issuer'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 small business  issuer's  internal
control over financial reporting.


Date: November 14, 2005


By:/s/ Scott R. Thompson
Scott R. Thompson,
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-14954-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 13 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-10 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 1 of 8 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 12 Filed 01/03/2007 Page 1 of 8

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-10 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 2 of 8 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 12 Filed 01/03/2007 Page 2 of 8

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-10 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 3 of 8 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 12 Filed 01/03/2007 Page 3 of 8

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-10 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 4 of 8 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 12 Filed 01/03/2007 Page 4 of 8

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-10 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 5 of 8 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 12 Filed 01/03/2007 Page 5 of 8

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-10 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 6 of 8 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 12 Filed 01/03/2007 Page 6 of 8

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-10 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 7 of 8 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 12 Filed 01/03/2007 Page 7 of 8

Case 1:07-cv-03296-JFK Document 2-10 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 8 of 8 Case 3:06-cv-02574-H-AJB Document 12 Filed 01/03/2007 Page 8 of 8
#### STATE v. WARREN

No. 90 PC.

Case below: 35 N.C. App. 468.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 8 May 1978.