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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Lancer
Orthodontics, Inc.'s second quarter 10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1998
<CASH>                                          97,810
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,407,971
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (99,118)
<INVENTORY>                                  2,142,774
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,568,157
<PP&E>                                       2,363,998
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,155,685)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,129,172
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          768,847
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    185,242
<COMMON>                                     4,700,906
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,525,823)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,129,172
<SALES>                                      3,074,520
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,074,520
<CGS>                                        1,963,574
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,963,574
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,608
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (38,936)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (39,736)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (39,736)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

CHRISTINE JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 4:09-cv-306/RS/WCS

STATE OF FLORIDA,

DEPARTMENT OF ELDER AFFAIRS,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is Plaintiff’s Notice of Resolution (Doc. 54). Pursuant to Local Rule 

16.2(D), it is ordered:

1. This case is dismissed from the active docket of the court.

2. In the event that the settlement is not consummated, the court reserves 

jurisdiction, upon motion filed by any party within sixty (60) days of the date of this 

Order, to amend or vacate and set aside this Order and to reinstate the case.

3. The clerk is directed to close the case file for administrative purposes, and 

upon the expiration of sixty (60) days without activity, the clerk is directed to close the 

case in its entirety for all purposes.

ORDERED on April 23, 2010.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.1

                 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 Ohio Legacy Corp (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.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 as of and for the periods covered in
                  the Report.

/s/ L. Dwight Douce
-----------------------
L. Dwight Douce
President, Chief Executive Office and Director

/s/ Eric S. Nadeau
-----------------------
Eric S. Nadeau
Chief Financial Officer and Vice President

March 26, 2003
-----------------------
Order filed December 21, 2017 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-17-00914-CV

____________

NDEM BURABARI ODUU, Appellant

V.

BARIVURE ELIZABETH DAN-DUKOR, Appellee

On Appeal from the 311th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2016-00572

ORDER

On December 7, 2017, appellant filed an affidavit of indigence in this court. 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.1(b)(1) provides that when a statement of 

inability to afford payment of costs was filed in the trial court, the party’s indigence 

status in the trial court carries forward on appeal. The exception to this rule is when 

the party files a motion alleging the party’s financial circumstances have materially 

changed since the date of the trial court’s order. Tex. R. App. P. 20.1(3). 
2

The clerk’s record has not been filed in this appeal. This court has not been 

advised whether appellant filed a statement of inability to afford payment of costs in 

the trial court, whether the statement was contested, or the ruling on any contest, if 

any. To determine appellant’s indigent status, we issue the following order for a 

partial clerk’s record.

We order the Harris County District Clerk to file a partial clerk’s record with 

the clerk of this court on or before January 5, 2018. The partial clerk’s record shall 

contain (1) the judgment being appealed; (2) any motion for new trial, other postjudgment motion, or request for findings of fact and conclusions of law; and (3) the 

notice of appeal. In addition, the partial clerk’s record shall contain: (4) appellant’s 

statement of inability to afford payment of costs; (5) the contest(s) to the statement, 

if any; (6) the trial court’s order ruling on any contest; and (7) any other documents 

pertaining to the claim of indigence and the contests thereto. 

PER CURIAM
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

WARREN AIKENS, JR., , 

Plaintiff,

vs. 4:10cv58-WS/WCS

C I MEDICAL CHAIRPERSON, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before me upon referral from the Clerk. In an order filed February

23, 2010, Plaintiff was directed to either (1) file a supplement to his motion for leave to

file in forma pauperis, or (2) pay the $350.00 filing fee, or (3) file a notice of voluntary

dismissal of this action by March 25, 2010. Plaintiff was specifically warned that a

recommendation would be made that this case be dismissed if he failed to comply with

that order. Doc. 3. To date, no response has been received from the Plaintiff. 
Page 2 of 2

A trial court has inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to

prosecute. Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962). 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) authorizes a district court to dismiss an action for failure to obey a

court order. Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 838 and cases cited (11th Cir.), cert.

denied, 493 U.S. 863 (1989). Since Plaintiff has failed to comply with an order or to

prosecute this case, his complaint should now be dismissed without prejudice. 

The Plaintiff shall have a 15 day period after service of this report and

recommendation in which to file objections. This will also afford Plaintiff a final

opportunity to show good cause for his failure to respond. Plaintiff may do so by a

motion for reconsideration which will be referred to me by the Clerk.

It is therefore, respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED

without prejudice. 

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on April 7, 2010. 

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being

served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review of

proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case No. 4:10cv58-WS/WCS
| 1.     | Such quarterly report of Form 10-Q for the quarter ending May 31, 2011, 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 such quarterly report of Form 10-Q for the quarter ending May 31, 2011, fairly represents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Tucana Lithium Corp. |

| Date: July 20, 2011                                                                                                                                 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                                                                |
| Oteegee Innovations Inc.                                                                                                                            |
|                                                                                                                                                |
| /s/ Jordan Starkman                                                                                                                                 |
| Jordan StarkmanPresident, Chief Executive OfficerChairman of the Board of DirectorsChief Financial Officer, Controller,Principal Accounting Officer |
|                                                                                                                                                |
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

DOUGLAS WALKER,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00097-MP -GRJ

WALTER A MCNEIL,

Respondent.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 17, Additional Information for Objection to

Report and Recommendation by Douglas Walker. On February 15, 2011, the Court adopted the

Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and dismissed Walker’s petition for writ of

habeas corpus without prejudice for failure to prosecute, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 

Petitioner now submits newly discovered evidence, including retaliatory claims, in support of his

objection to the Report and Recommendation. The Court construes this renewed objection as a

motion for reconsideration.

Habeas is inappropriate for the relief being sought and that relief, if any, would be

cognizable only under a civil action for deprivation of rights, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

Where a litigant is not challenging the fact or duration of confinement, but rather the conditions

of that confinement, then civil rights is the proper avenue of relief. See Porter v. Nussle, 534

U.S. 516, 526, 122 S. Ct. 983, 990 (2002). As the Magistrate Judge noted in his Report and

Recommendation, Petitioner’s claims might be cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; however,

Petitioner would not be permitted to pursue such claims in forma pauperis because he is subject
Page 2 of 2

to the three-strikes bar of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Accordingly it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The motion for reconsideration, Doc. 17, is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 11th day of April, 2011

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case No: 1:10-cv-00097-MP -GRJ
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

In the Matter of 

JOSEPH DAVID NAYLOR 

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT 

FROM INACTIVE STATUS 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

No. 131 DB 2015 (No. 61 RST 2015) 

Attorney Registration No. 90215 

(Lackawanna County) 

O R D E R 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 7th day of October, 2015, the Report and Recommendation of 

Disciplinary Board Member dated September 25, 2015, is approved and it is ORDERED 

that Joseph David Naylor, who has been on Inactive Status, has never been suspended 

or disbarred, and has demonstrated that he has the moral qualifications, competency 

and learning in law required for admission to practice in the Commonwealth, shall be 

and is, hereby reinstated to active status as a member of the Bar of this 

Commonwealth. The expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and 

processing of this matter shall be paid by the Petitioner.
# National American Indian Heritage Month, 2007

National American Indian Heritage Month is an opportunity to honor the many contributions of American Indians and Alaska Natives and to recognize the strong and living traditions of the first people to call our land home. 

American Indians and Alaska Natives continue to shape our Nation by preserving the heritage of their ancestors and by contributing to the rich diversity that is our country's strength. Their dedicated efforts to honor their proud heritage have helped others gain a deeper understanding of the vibrant and ancient customs of the Native American community. We also express our gratitude to the American Indians and Alaska Natives who serve in our Nation's military and work to extend the blessings of liberty around the world. 

My Administration is committed to supporting the American Indian and Alaska Native cultures. In June, I signed the “Native American Home Ownership Opportunity Act of 2007,” which reauthorizes the Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program, guaranteeing loans for home improvements and expanding home ownership for Native American families. Working with tribal governments, we will strive for greater security, healthier lifestyles, better schools, and new economic opportunities for American Indians and Alaska Natives. 

During National American Indian Heritage Month, we underscore our commitment to working with tribes on a government-to-government basis and to supporting tribal sovereignty and self-determination. During this month, I also encourage Federal agencies to continue their work with tribal governments to ensure sound cooperation. Efforts such as on-line training programs will improve interagency collaboration in the Federal Indian Affairs community and help to strengthen relationships with tribes, building a brighter future for all our citizens. 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim November 2007 as National American Indian Heritage Month. I call upon all Americans to commemorate this month with appropriate programs and activities. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirty-first day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-second. 

[FR Doc. 07-5509

Billing code 3195-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 26 (Thursday, February 8, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 5983]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-558]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 
Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive 
and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; RFP NIH-NIDDK-06-07, 
Urologic Diseases in America.
    Date: February 26, 2007.
    Time: 2:30 p.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 
Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 
(Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Paul A. Rushing, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of 
Health, Room 747, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, 
(301) 594-8895, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7f0d0a0c171611180f3f1a070b0d1e5111161b1b145111161751181009"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c2b0b7b1aaabaca5b282a7bab6b0a3ecacaba6a6a9ecacabaaeca5adb4">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, 
Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metrobolic Research; 93.848, Digestive 
Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology 
and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: February 1, 2007.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-558 Filed 2-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Ray Elbert PARKER, Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, MARYLAND, Appellee.

No. 9932.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued June 2, 1965.

Decided June 28, 1965.

*465Robert H. Reiter and Andrew P. Zim-mer, Washington, D. C. (David B. Isbell, Washington, D. C., on brief), for appellant.

Paul M. Nussbaum, Hyattsville, Md., for appellee.

F. Duncan Cornell, Walter S. Levin, and Sauerwein, Benson & Boyd, Baltimore, Md., on brief for amici curiae, Maryland State Teachers’ Ass’n, Inc. and Prince George’s County Teachers’ Ass’n, Inc.

Thomas B. Finan, Atty. Gen. of Maryland, and Stuart H. Rome, Asst. Atty. Gen. of Maryland, on brief for amicus curiae, Maryland State Board of Education.

Before BRYAN and BELL, Circuit Judges, and BARKSDALE, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

His employment as a teacher under a contract with the Board of Education of Prince George’s County, Maryland was arbitrarily and illegally terminated, Ray Elbert Parker charged in his complaint, praying the District Court to order his reinstatement and award him damages. From an adverse summary judgment he appeals. We affirm upon the third defense pleaded in the Board’s answer, viz., the failure of the complaint to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. F.R.Civ.P. 12(b) (6).

We need not pass on the merits of the Fifth, Fourteenth and First Amendment deprivations and abridgement asserted by the appellant, consisting of the Board’s termination of his employment (1.) without a hearing and (2.) because of his instruction from a book which he said had been proscribed by the Board in violation of freedom of speech. Our decision rests entirely on the contract. By its terms Parker was only employed provisionally and wholly without academic tenure, express or implied. The agreement was that his engagement was simply probationary and “that either of the parties to this contract may terminate it at the end of the first or second school year by giving thirty days’ notice in writing to the other during the month of June or July”. Concededly, the termination complied with this stipulation. We join the District Judge in upholding the Board’s action on this ground. Parker v. Board of Education, 237 F.Supp. 222 (D.C.Md.1965).

 Summary judgment, we think . too, was appropriate because the premises underlying the decision were without genuine controversy; they appeared in the contract and other supporting papers with the motion. These included the school statutes of Maryland and by-laws of the State Board of Education as well *466as “certain letters and other documents” submitted by agreement. All of this evidence was proper for consideration on the motion. F.R.Civ.P. 56,12(c).

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 202 (Friday, October 19, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59307-59308]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5164]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Route 66 Corridor Preservation Program Advisory Council Renewal

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of committee renewal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice is published in accordance with Section 9(a) of 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C. Appendix). 
Following consultation with the General Services Administration, notice 
is hereby given that the Secretary of the Interior has formally renewed 
the Route 66 Corridor Preservation Program Advisory Council to provide 
advice and recommendations on program guidance relating to Route 6 
Corridor preservation. Public Law 106-45 (16 U.S.C. 461 note), August 
10, 1999, authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the 
National Park Service, to provide a program of technical assistance and 
grants that will set priorities for the preservation of the Route 66 
corridor, which passes through Illinois, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, 
Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Members of the committee 
represent states through which Route 66 passes, non-profit Route 66 
preservation entities and other interested organizations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Taylor, National Park Service, 
Long Distance Trails Group Office--Santa Fe, P.O. Box 728, 1100 Old 
Santa

[[Page 59308]]

Fe Trail, Santa Fe, NM 87504-0728; (505) 988-6742.

Certification

    I hereby certify that the administrative establishment of the Route 
66 Corridor Preservation Program Advisory Council is necessary and in 
the public interest in connection with the performance of duties 
imposed on the Department of the Interior by the Route 66 Corridor 
Preservation Act of 1999 (16 U.S.C. 461 note).

    Dated: August 6, 2007.
Dirk Kempthorne,
Secretary of the Interior.
[FR Doc. 07-5164 Filed 10-18-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-52-M
#### TECH LAND DEVELOPMENT v. INSURANCE CO.

No. 351P82.

Case below: 57 N.C. App. 566.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 August 1982.
# United States Court **of Appeals** 

**f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 20

- 60106

**United States of America,**

Plaintiff

— Appellant

**,**

versus

**Okanlawan O. Norbert,**

Defendant

— Appellee

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 3:19

- cr

- 50

Before **Owen,** Chief Judge

**,** and **Davis, Jones, Smith, Stewart,**  **Dennis, Elrod, Southwick, Haynes, Graves, Higginson,**  **Costa, Willett, Ho, Duncan, Eng**  **elhardt, Oldham,** and **Wilson,** Circuit Judges

**.**

**Per C**  **uriam :** 

The judgment of the district court is **AFFIRMED** by an equally

divided court. United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit 

### FILED
February 4, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk Case: 20-60106 Document: 00516192545 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/04/2022