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



<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,893
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           5,010
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     41,554
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          19,126
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            18,490
<LOANS>                                        152,854
<ALLOWANCE>                                        956
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 226,235
<DEPOSITS>                                     198,819
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,137
<LONG-TERM>                                      6,330
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            13
<OTHER-SE>                                      19,936
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 226,235
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,942
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  942
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    71
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,955
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               2,412
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,515
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,440
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       21
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,008
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    521
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         348
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       348
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.29
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.65
<LOANS-NON>                                        691
<LOANS-PAST>                                       274
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   308
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    829
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   929
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        1
<RECOVERIES>                                         7
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  956
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               376
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            580
        


</TABLE>
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2357

To amend title 38, United States Code, to permit retired members of the

Armed Forces who have a service-connected disability to receive military

retired pay concurrently with veterans’ disability compensation.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 5, 2000

Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. INOUYE) introduced the following bill; which

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To amend title 38, United States Code, to permit retired

members of the Armed Forces who have a service-connected disability to receive military retired pay concurrently with veterans’ disability compensation.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Armed Forces Concur5 rent Retirement and Disability Payment Act of 2000’’.
2

•S 2357 IS

1 SEC. 2. CONCURRENT PAYMENT OF RETIRED PAY AND

2 COMPENSATION FOR RETIRED MEMBERS

3 WITH SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITIES.

4 (a) CONCURRENT PAYMENT.—Section 5304(a) of

5 title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding at the

6 end the following new paragraph:

7 ‘‘(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1)

8 and section 5305 of this title, compensation under chapter

9 11 of this title may be paid to a person entitled to receive

10 retired or retirement pay described in such section 5305

11 concurrently with such person’s receipt of such retired or

12 retirement pay.’’.

13 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

14 subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of the enact15 ment of this Act, and apply with respect to payments of

16 compensation for months beginning on or after that date.

17 (c) PROHIBITION ON RETROACTIVE BENEFITS.—No

18 benefits shall be paid to any person by virtue of the

19 amendment made by subsection (a) for any period before

20 the effective date of this Act as specified in subsection (b).

Æ
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7003
KEVIN HAUGHTON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JON GALLEY, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA01-2562-PJM) Submitted: December 16, 2002 Decided: December 19, 2002 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kevin Haughton, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Mary Ann Rapp Ince, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Kevin Haughton seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Haughton has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Haughton v. Galley , No. CA-01-2562-PJM (D. Md. June 6, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
# Sessions of Congress  

**

----

 

-  All-Night Sessions of the Senate (1915-Present) 
-  Dates of Sessions of Congress 
-  Days in Session (Congress.gov) 
-  Joint Sessions & Meetings of Congress 
-  Lame Duck Sessions (1940-Present) 
-  Saturday Sessions of the Senate (1968-Present) 
-  Sunday Sessions of the Senate (1861-Present) 
-  Senate Sessions while Presidents Lay in State 

        -  Bills, Acts, & Laws 
        -  Nominations 
        -  Treaties 
        -  Votes 
        -  Floor Proceedings 
        -  Rules & Procedure 
        -  Landmark Legislation 
        -  Sessions of Congress 
        -  Senate Archives 
        -  Public Disclosure 

### Related Links 

Tentative Legislative Schedule

Past Legislative Schedules

Senate Meeting Places

House of Representatives Schedule (house.gov)

### Glossary Terms 

adjourn

adjournment sine die

closed sessions

joint session

"lame duck" session
gmacexhibit103.htm - Generated by SEC Publisher for SEC Filing


 

Exhibit 10.3

FORM OF JOINDER AGREEMENT

     Reference is made to the Sixth Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Operating Agreement of GMAC LLC, dated as of May 22, 2009, as amended (the “LLC Agreement”). Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the LLC Agreement.

     Pursuant to the admission of the undersigned as an Additional Member of the LLC Agreement, the undersigned agrees to be bound by all the applicable terms and conditions of the LLC Agreement. This Joinder Agreement is delivered by the undersigned pursuant to Section 3.2(b) of the LLC Agreement.

     This Joinder Agreement and any amendments, waivers, consents or supplements hereto may be executed in any number of counterparts and by different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be deemed to be an original, but all such counterparts together shall constitute one and the same agreement.

     THIS JOINDER AGREEMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAW OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE.

     In witness whereof, this letter agreement has been duly executed and delivered by the duly authorized representatives of the parties hereto as of the date written below.





	By: __________________________________
	Name: ________________________________
	Title: _________________________________
	Mailing Address: ________________________
	
	_____________________________________
	Telephone: ____________________________
	Facsimile: _____________________________
	Electronic mail address: ___________________
	Taxpayer Identification  
	or Social Security Number: ________________
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     Exhibit 23.






The Board of Directors
FPIC Insurance Group, Inc.

We consent to the use of our report dated March 5, 1999 relating to the 
consolidated balance sheets of FPIC Insurance Group, Inc. as of December 31, 
1998 and 1997 and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive 
income, changes in shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years 
in the three-year period ended December 31, 1998 incorporated herein by 
reference in the registration statement on Forms S-8 of FPIC Insurance Group, 
Inc.'s Director Stock Option Plan (333-72601), and Omnibus Incentive Plan 
(333-72599), and Florida Physicians Insurance Company's Employee Stock Purchase 
Plan (333-09365) and Defined Contribution Plan (333-09375).


                                              KPMG LLP


Jacksonville, Florida
March 29, 1999
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-15-00234- CV
Anthony T ram m ell, Appellan t

v. Cricket Hollow Apartm ents, Appellee

F ROM TH E CO UNTY COURT AT LAW NO . 1 O F TRAVIS CO UNTY NO. C-1 -CV- 15- 0018 74, H ONO RAB LE TO DD T. WO NG, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
On J une 19, 2015, this Court sent notice to Anthony Trammell that the cler k’s rec ord was overdue and that this Court had rece ived not ice from the Travis County cler k’s office that no p ay ment had been receive d or arrang ements m ade for pay ment for the cler

k’s record. T h i s C o u rt reque sted that Trammell make arr ang ements for the rec ord and submit a status repor t. Trammell also
was notified that his app ea l wo u l d be dismiss ed for want of prosec ution if he did respond to this Court by J une 29, 2015. To date, Trammell has not responde d to the Court’s notice. Acc ording ly , we dismiss the appea l for wa nt of prosec ution. SeeTex. R. App. P . 42.3(b), ( c).__________________________________________ Melissa Goodwin, Jus tice Be fore J ustices Puryear , Goodwin, and B ourland Dismissed for Want of Prosecution Filed: Jul y

2, 2015

2
<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 Quarterly Report of XETA Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended January 31, 2003, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Jack R. Ingram,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

         (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/ Jack R. Ingram
                                                ---------------------------
                                                    Jack R. Ingram
                                                    Chief Executive Officer
                                                    March 14, 2003
<PAGE>
                                   EXHIBIT 23
             Consent of Independent Accountants
                              
                              
                              
We consent to the incorporation by reference in the
following registration statements of ImageMatrix Corporation
and in the related prospectuses of our report dated March
25, 1998, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of ImageMatrix Corporation included in this
Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the year ended December 31,
1997:

1.   Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-37119)
     pertaining to the registration of 1,500,000 shares of
     ImageMatrix Corporation Common Stock.
     
2.   Registration Statement on Form S-3/A (No. 333-28843)
     pertaining to the registration of 7,911,149 shares of
     ImageMatrix Corporation Common Stock.
     
     
     
                                   ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Denver, Colorado
April 14, 1998
# Cloture Motions - 71st Congress

**

----

|   |  |  |
|--------|--|--|
| From March 4, 1929 through March 3, 1931, 1                    cloture                    motion was                     filed.                 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                                                            |
| Motions             Filed in                 1930                                                                                               | Action             and Result |
| **Date**                                                                                                                                        | **Measure** | **Subject** | **Filed By** | **Date** | **Vote** | **Result** |
| Jun 24                                                                                                                                          | H.R.12902 | Deficiency Appropriations | Jones | Jun 25 | UC | W |
|                                                                                                                                            |
|                                                                                                                                                 |
|  **Vote Key:**                    61-32 No. 2 (for example) - tally and Roll Call Vote number; UC - Unanimous                     Consent. |
|  **Result Key:**                    F - Failed; I - Invoked; N - No action; V - Vitiated; W - Withdrawn.                                   |
|                                                                                                                                                 |
|                                                                                                                                            |

        -  Bills, Acts, & Laws 
        -  Nominations 
        -  Treaties 
        -  Votes 
        -  Floor Proceedings 
        -  Rules & Procedure 
        -  Landmark Legislation 
        -  Sessions of Congress 
        -  Senate Archives 
        -  Public Disclosure
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains certain summary financial information extracted from the
Company's financial statements and notes thereto and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.  The Company files an
unclassified balance sheet, certain line items are not applicable.  All values
except share amounts are in thousands.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                      	107,504
<SECURITIES>                                      	0
<RECEIVABLES>                                462,096
<ALLOWANCES>                                      	0
<INVENTORY>                                       	0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  	0
<PP&E>                                      	 63,121
<DEPRECIATION>                                39,380
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               906,398
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             	0
<BONDS>                                       81,634
<COMMON>                                       5,325
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             	0
<PREFERRED>                                     	857
<OTHER-SE>                                    55,182
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 906,398
<SALES>                                           	0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           	 701,581
<CGS>                                             	0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                683,545
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              14,775
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  	0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,747
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                2,257
<INCOME-TAX>                                  	1,016
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,241
<DISCONTINUED>                                    	0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   	0
<CHANGES>                                         	0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,241
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    .13
        

</TABLE>
#### S. A. OLSNESS, as Commissioner of Insurance of the State of North Dakota, Acting for and in Behalf of the State Bonding Fund of the State of North Dakota, Appellant, v. L. R. BAIRD, as Receiver of the First State Bank of Amidon, North Dakota, and J. S. Douglas, Respondents.

(201 N. W. 906.)

Per Ourtam.

This case was submitted with Olsnoss, as Commis*65sioner of Ins. v. Baird, as Receiver, 52 N. D. 1, 201 N. W. 993, and it was stipulated between-tbe parties that the decision in that case should control this case. Hence, on the authority of that case, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

CHRISTIANSON, JOHNSON, NuESSLE, and BlRDZELL, JJ., COUCUr.

Beonson, Oh. J., dissents.
CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-Q (the Report) of Telemetrix Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, I, William Becker, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive and Financial Officer) of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, 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.



|November 10, 2008
|-----------------

/s/ William BeckerName: William BeckerTitle: Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)















---
Exhibit 32.2 

 

           CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

                SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

     In connection with the Form 10-K of American TonerServ Corp., a company duly formed under the laws of Delaware (the "Company"), for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Ryan Vice, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his/her knowledge, 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. 

 

 

 

April 9, 2010                         /s/ Ryan Vice

                                      Ryan Vice

                                      Principal Financial Officer

   

 

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. 

 

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

 

 

 

----
## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### JUL 29 1997 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

MARVIN BISHOP, Petitioner-Appellant,
v. LARRY EMBRY; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF COLORADO, Respondents-Appellees. No. 96-1404 (D.C. No. 96-B-664) (District of Colorado)

ORDER
Before SEYMOUR , Chief Judge, PORFILIO and MURPHY , Circuit Judges.

Marvin Bishop appeals the dismissal of his pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter is before us upon an application to proceed without payment of fees and an application for certificate of appealability. Having established his inability to pay, Mr. Bishop is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis. United States v. Simmonds , 111 F.3d 737 (10th Cir. 1997). The motion to proceed without payment of fees is GRANTED.- 2 -

We have examined the application for certificate of appealability and the record and conclude Mr. Bishop has failed to demonstrate the denial of a constitutional right by showing the issues raised in his appeal are debatable among jurists; that a court could resolve the issues differently, or that the questions deserve further proceedings. Substantially for the reasons cited in the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the certificate of appealability is DENIED and the appeal is DISMISSED.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
John C. Porfilio Circuit Judge