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


<ARTICLE>                                        5
<CIK>                                   0000076958
<NAME>                       PEERLESS TUBE COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000
<CURRENCY>                              US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                   APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                     JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                            1
<CASH>                                                20,000
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      1,351,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (100,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          733,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   2,062,000
<PP&E>                                            22,927,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (21,705,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     3,434,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              3,082,000
<BONDS>                                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                           3,382,000
<OTHER-SE>                                       (4,859,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       3,434,000
<SALES>                                            3,291,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   3,293,000
<CGS>                                              3,146,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        437,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   115,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (405,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        0
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (405,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                           (0.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              0



</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6687

STANLEY LORENZO WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

D. W. GRIFFIN; CABARRUS COUNTY, Sheriff

Department; W. ERWIN SPAINHOUR,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,

District Judge. (CA-03-218-1)

Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: June 26, 2003

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stanley Lorenzo Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Stanley Lorenzo Williams appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find that

this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for

the reasons stated by the district court. See Williams v. Griffin,

No. CA-03-218-1 (M.D.N.C. Apr. 4, 2003). 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
**Exhibit 23.1**

Consentof Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors

Fox Chase Bancorp, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporationby reference in the registration statement No. 333-138175 to be filed by FoxChase Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated March 28, 2007, with respect to theconsolidated statements of condition of Fox Chase Bancorp, Inc., and subsidiaryas of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements ofoperations, changes in stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of theyears in the two-year period ended December 31, 2006, which report appears inthe December 31, 2006 annual report on Form 10-K of Fox Chase Bancorp, Inc. andsubsidiary.

Our report datedMarch 28, 2007, on the consolidated statements of condition of Fox ChaseBancorp, Inc., and subsidiary as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the relatedconsolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders’ equity, andcash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31,2006, refers to Fox Chase Bancorp, Inc.’s adoption of Statement of FinancialAccounting Standards No. 158, *Employers’Accounting for Defined Benefit Pensions and Other Post Retirement Plans,*effective December 31, 2006.
| /s/ KPMG LLP               |
|----------------------------|
|                       |
|                       |
| Philadelphia, Pennsylvania |
| March 28, 2007             |

 

----
Exhibit
10.12




LOAN
AGREEMENT
 February
11, 2009
 
 Richard N. Jeffs (the
“Lender”) of 4 Montpelier Street, Suite 521, London, SW71EE, advanced US$25,000 (the “Principal
Sum”) to Red Metal Resources Ltd. (the “Borrower”) of 195 Park Avenue, Thunder
Bay, Ontario, P7B 1B9.  The Lender advanced the funds on February 11,
2009
  The
Borrower agrees to repay the Principal Sum on demand, together with interest
calculated and compounded monthly at the rate of 8% per year (the “Interest”)
from February 11, 2009.  The Borrower is liable for repayment for the
Principal Sum and accrued Interest and any costs that the Lender incurs in
trying to collect the Principal Sum and the Interest.
  The
Borrower will evidence the debt and its repayment of the Principal Sum and the
Interest with a promissory note in the attached form.
  LENDER
                
                
                BORROWERRichard N.
      Jeffs
                
                
                Red Metal Resources
      Ltd.Per:
                
                
                Per:/s/
      Richard N. Jeffs
                
                
                /s/
      Caitlin JeffsName
                
                
                Authorized
      Signatory
 
 1
 
 PROMISSORY
NOTE
  Principal
      Amount:  US$25,000
              February 11,
      2009
  For value
received Red Metal Resources Ltd., (the “Borrower”) promises to pay on demand to
the order of Richard N. Jeffs(the “Lender”) the sum
of $25,000 lawful money of United States of America (the “Principal Sum”)
together with interest on the Principal Sum from February 11, 2009 (“Effective
Date”) both before and after maturity, default and judgment at the Interest Rate
as defined below.
 
 For the
purposes of this promissory note, Interest Rate means 8 per cent per
year.  Interest at the Interest Rate must be calculated and compounded
monthly not in advance from and including the Effective Date (for an effective
rate of 8.3% per annum calculated monthly), and is payable together with the
Principal Sum when the Principal Sum is repaid.
 
 The
Borrower may repay the Principal Sum and the Interest in whole or in part at any
time.
 
 The
Borrower waives presentment, protest, notice of protest and notice of dishonour
of this promissory note.
 
 BORROWERRed Metal Resources
      Ltd.Per:/s/
      Caitlin JeffsAuthorized Signatory






2
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

HAROLD HARTER, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

E.K. McDANIEL, Warden; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees. 

No. 16-17101 

D.C. No. 3:16-cv-00118-RCJ-WGC 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Robert Clive Jones, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 24, 2017**

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and SILVERMAN and RAWLINSON, 

Circuit Judges. 

Harold Harter appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging equal protection and due process claims in 

connection with parole consideration. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to prosecute. 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

JUN 6 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-17101 

Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058, 1063 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Harter’s action 

for failure to prosecute because Harter was given leave to amend his complaint and 

he failed to do so. See Edwards, 356 F.3d at 1065 (“The failure of the plaintiff 

eventually to respond to the court’s ultimatum – either by amending the complaint 

or by indicating to the court that it will not do so – is properly met with the 

sanction of a Rule 41(b) dismissal.”); Yourish v. Cal. Amplifier, 191 F.3d 983, 989 

(9th Cir. 1999) (listing factors to be considered in dismissing a case as a sanction

for failure to prosecute).

Because Harter’s action was dismissed as a sanction for failure to prosecute, 

the dismissal of his due process claim is not reviewable. See Al-Torki v. Kaempen, 

78 F.3d 1381, 1386 (9th Cir. 1996) (“[I]nterlocutory orders, generally appealable 

after final judgment, are not appealable after a dismissal for failure to 

prosecute[.]”). 

AFFIRMED.
| **Note 16 - Due to Related Parties (Details) (Hego [Member])** | 12 Months Ended |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------|
||
| Hego [Member]                                                  |            |
| **Note 16 - Due to Related Parties (Details) [Line Items]**    |            |
| Related Party Transaction, Rate                                | 5.95%           |

| X                                                                                                                                                                       |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Details**Name:**chyr_Note16DuetoRelatedPartiesDetailsLineItems**Namespace Prefix:**chyr_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Identify the stated interest rate per the agreement, for example, leasing and debt arrangements between related parties.
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**us-gaap_RelatedPartyTransactionRate**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**num:percentItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
#### Emil Bachmann, Appellant, v. Union Railway Company of New York City, Respondent.

Determination affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Laughlin, J., dissented.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

STATE OF WASHINGTON,

Respondent,

v.

J.T,

DOB: 3/28/95,

Appellant.

No. 70033-2-1

DIVISION ONE o

e3 —KCZ

UNPUBLISHED OPINION % ^o

FILED: April 7, 2014 ^. ££c

« So

PER CURIAM. J.T. appeals a juvenile court disposition finding him guilty of co

one count offourth degree assault. J.T.'s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion

to withdraw on the ground that there is no basis for a good faith argument on review.

Pursuant to State v. Theobald, 78 Wn.2d 184, 470 P.2d 188 (1970), and Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), the motion to

withdraw must:

[1] be accompanied by a briefreferring to anything in the record that

might arguably support the appeal. [2] A copy of counsel's briefshould

be furnished the indigent and [3] time allowed him to raise any points

that he chooses; [4] the court-not counsel-then proceeds, after a full

examination of all the proceedings, to decide whether the case is wholly

frivolous.

Theobald, 78 Wn.2d at 185 (quoting Anders v. California, 386 U.S. at 744).

This procedure has been followed. J.T.'s counsel on appeal filed a brief with

the motion to withdraw. J.T. was served with a copy of the brief and informed of the
No. 70033-2-1/2

right to file a statement of additional grounds for review. He did not file a statement

of additional grounds.

The facts are accurately set forth in counsel's brief in support of the motion to

withdraw. The court has reviewed the briefs filed in this court and has independently

reviewed the entire record. The court specifically considered the following potential

issues raised by counsel:

1. Whether the trial court erred in finding that J.T. did not act in selfdefense?

2. Whether the charging document adequately informed J.T. of the

elements of the charge?

The potential issues are wholly frivolous. Counsel's motion to withdraw is

granted and the appeal is dismissed.

For the court:

£b*,J •
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         173,979
<SECURITIES>                                   273,343
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,893,468
<ALLOWANCES>                                   757,364
<INVENTORY>                                  3,396,996
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            23,958,654
<PP&E>                                      10,114,531
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,532,760
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              28,525,131
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       13,473,981
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,464,192
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,586,958
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                28,525,131
<SALES>                                     36,429,369
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            36,429,369
<CGS>                                       24,554,877
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               24,554,877
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,148,933
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                45,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              40,323
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,002,783
<INCOME-TAX>                                   715,318
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,287,465
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,287,465
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.88
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.88


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.4

Statement of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec 1350, as created by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of
Southern California Gas Company (the "Company") certifies that:

(i)	the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2005 (the "Quarterly Report") fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; and

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



May 4, 2005
                                               /S/ STEVEN D. DAVIS
                                             ______________________
                                               Steven D. Davis
                                               Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO




18 U.S.C. 1350




Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsection (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) each of the undersigned officers of Red Metal Resources Ltd. (the “Company”) does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:




(a)   The annual report on Form 10-K for the period ended January 31, 2010 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;  and




(b)   Information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Dated:  April 30, 2010




/s/ Caitlin JeffsCaitlin Jeffs, Chief Executive Officer and President/s/ John Da CostaJohn Da Costa, Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2




CERTIFICATION




The undersigned officer of China Ruitai International Holdings Co., Ltd. (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q to which this certification is attached (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date: August 15, 2011

By:
/s/ Gang MaGang Ma, Chief Financial Officer
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6473 

To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to publish the number of 

known or suspected terrorists encountered attempting to enter the United 

States on a monthly basis, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 21, 2022 

Mr. PFLUGER (for himself, Mr. KATKO, and Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to publish 

the number of known or suspected terrorists encountered 

attempting to enter the United States on a monthly 

basis, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PUBLICATION BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HOME4 LAND SECURITY OF THE NUMBER OF KNOWN 

5 OR SUSPECTED TERRORISTS ENCOUNTERED 

6 ATTEMPTING TO ENTER THE UNITED STATES. 

7 The Secretary of Homeland Security shall, not later 

8 than the fifteenth day of each month, publish the total 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6473 IH

1 number of known or suspected terrorists, and individuals 

2 whose identities are included in the Terrorist Screening 

3 Database, encountered by the Department of Homeland 

4 Security attempting to enter the United States during the 

5 immediately preceding month. Each such report shall— 

6 (1) include the aggregate such number, and 

7 such number disaggregated by geographic regions of 

8 such encounters, including distinctions relating to 

9 whether such encounters were land-, air-, or sea10 based; and 

11 (2) be published on a public-facing website of 

12 the Department. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 3(a)

 

THE PEOPLES GAS LIGHT AND COKE COMPANY

ACTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

BY WRITTEN CONSENT IN LIEU OF MEETING

 

The Board of Directors of the Company has taken the following action by unanimous Written Consent:

 

RESOLVED That effective October 1, 2001, the proposed amendments to the By-Laws of the Company attached hereto as Exhibit A be, and they hereby are, approved.

 

 

 

Dated as of:      October 1, 2001
---
















---
















---
















---
















---
















---
















---
















---
















---
















---
















---
















---
















---
















---
















---
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of

-- ) ) Evergreen Fire Alarms, LLC ) ) Under Contract No. Wl5QKN-14-P-0069 ) APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT:
APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 59880

S. Christopher Easley, Esq.

General Counsel Raymond M. Saunders, Esq.

Army ChiefTrial Attorney MAJ Cameron Edlefsen, JA

Trial Attorney ORDER OF DISMISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. Dated: 2 June 2015 

### //**/:~:;/** 

# . ff ,/



### ////:_

. ;/ // . MARK N. STEMPLE Administrative Judge Acting Chairman Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 59880, Appeal ofEvergreen Fire Alarms, LLC, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Note:  This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1997 and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001029309
<NAME> PERIMETER CREDIT, L.P.
<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>                                          35,110
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   22,028
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,186
<INVENTORY>                                     68,658
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               106,105
<PP&E>                                          87,561
<DEPRECIATION>                                  52,448
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 351,654
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           68,519
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     11,249
<COMMON>                                            53
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   351,654
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                63,842
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   68,596
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,523
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (11,277)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,496)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,781)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,781)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        
<PAGE>

</TABLE>