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


<ARTICLE>                                           7
<MULTIPLIER>                                    1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                                 0
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                           0
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                       0
<CASH>                                          25,170
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 724,363
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                      0
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     217,784
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   724,363
<PREMIUMS>                                           0
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                             (1,093)
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                   0
<OTHER-INCOME>                                       0
<BENEFITS>                                           0
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                          0
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                                 0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (21,806)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (21,806)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (10,184)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (31,990)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (2.45)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (2.45)
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0





</TABLE>
#### Schreiber, Appellant, *v.*The Universal Car Co., Appellee.

(Decided November 7, 1938.)

*Messrs. Bettinger, Schmitt & Kreis,*for appellant.

*Messrs. Harmon, Colston, Goldsmith & Hoadly*and *Mr. Henry B. Street,*for appellee.

Hamilton, J.

The action was for damages growing out of an automobile collision.

The defendant, The Universal Car Company, appellee here, was a dealer in Ford motor cars and had *264in its employ a salesman by the name of George Mun-day. Munday was given a list of prospects by the dealer, and called upon the persons listed in order to effect sales of Ford automobiles. He was in the employ of the company on a commission basis.

To carry on his work, Munday operated a Ford automobile which he purchased under a salesman’s contract with the defendant car company. This salesman’s' contract for the purchase of a car required a down payment and subsequent payments. On the day of the accident, Munday visited a prospect, driving his car which he had purchased under the salesman’s contract. He effected a sale by an exchange of cars, the company taking in a used car in down payment. When the sale was' completed, a young man by the name of Ger-gen appeared at the place, which was a filling station, and Munday directed Gergen to drive his, Munday’s, automobile back to his place of business, and Munday drove the used car which he had taken in in trade. Gergen, in driving Munday’s automobile back, had a collision with the plaintiff’s automobile, in which collision the plaintiff was seriously injured.

The plaintiff in the case seeks' to hold the car company, defendant, under the master and servant rule.

Had .the accident been caused by Munday by his own negligent driving, there might be some question as to the liability of his employer. There are circumstances which would indicate that in such case the accident might be the personal act of Munday, and not one in the course of his' employment. Certainly, his engaging an irresponsible driver to drive his own car to defendant’s place of business would not be an act in the course of employment, which the car company could reasonably anticipate.

The trial court was correct in instructing the verdict as it did, and its judgment is affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Ross, P. J., and Matthews, J., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-10101

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

SCOTT MATTHEW GOSS,

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:17-CR-156-2

Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Scott Matthew Goss pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with the 

intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, and the district 

court sentenced him to a below-guidelines sentence of 144 months of 

imprisonment. On appeal, Goss argues that the district court’s finding that he 

was accountable for over six kilograms of methamphetamine was erroneous. 

He also contends that the district court’s imposition of a two-level firearm 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 18, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-10101 Document: 00514802101 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/18/2019
No. 18-10101

2

enhancement to his base offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) was 

erroneous and violated his due process rights. 

We review the district court’s determination of drug quantity for clear 

error and will affirm the finding as long as it is “plausible in light of the record 

as a whole.” United States v. Betancourt, 422 F.3d 240, 246 (5th Cir. 2005)

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Given that the district court’s 

drug-quantity finding was based on sufficiently reliable evidence that Goss 

failed to rebut, he fails to show clear error. See United States v. Harris, 702 

F.3d 226, 230 (5th Cir. 2012); Betancourt, 422 F.3d at 246; see also United 

States v. Clark, 389 F.3d 141, 142 (5th Cir. 2004).

We also review the district court’s determination that Goss possessed a 

firearm for purposes of § 2D1.1(b)(1) for clear error. United States v. King, 773 

F.3d 48, 52 (5th Cir. 2014). The Government submitted evidence at sentencing 

establishing that a “temporal and spatial relation existed between” a firearm, 

drug trafficking activity, and Goss. See United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 

517 F.3d 751, 764-65 (5th Cir. 2008). Given that Goss failed to submit any 

competent rebuttal evidence, he cannot show that the district court’s 

application of the § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement was clear error. See King, 773 

F.3d at 52. Additionally, we hold that Goss’s argument that the district court’s 

imposition of the § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement violated his due process rights 

has no merit. See United States v. Hebert, 813 F.3d 551, 564-65 (5th Cir. 2015); 

United States v. Andaverde-Tiñoco, 741 F.3d 509, 525 (5th Cir. 2013).

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 18-10101 Document: 00514802101 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/18/2019
EXHIBIT 32


                            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 Advance Display Technologies,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended December 31,
2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the
Company.


/s/ MATTHEW W. SHANKLE
------------------------------------------------
Matthew W. Shankle
President, Chief Executive and Financial Officer

February 23, 2004
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-3856

_____________________________

THOMAS RICARDO AVILA,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County.

Wesley R. Douglas, Judge.

May 2, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

OSTERHAUS, WINOKUR, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant 

Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant; Thomas Ricardo 

Avila, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 Knight Fuller, Inc. (the "Company"), on
Form 10-KSB for the annual period ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacities 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 and 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.


Date: April 14, 2004         /s/ William G. Knuff, III
                             -------------------------
                             William G. Knuff, III
                             Co-chairman, Co-chief executive officer and
                             Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
third quarter 10-Q filing and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000769879
<NAME> RECYCLING INDUSTRIES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                             469
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     7538
<ALLOWANCES>                                        40
<INVENTORY>                                       4030
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 13249
<PP&E>                                           35930
<DEPRECIATION>                                    2950
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   52802
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            10637
<BONDS>                                          25188
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        500
<COMMON>                                            14
<OTHER-SE>                                       14963
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     52802
<SALES>                                          40558
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 40558
<CGS>                                            34447
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    34447
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  3968
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1534
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    666
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (595)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               1261
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1261
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
        

</TABLE>
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10
- 12
- 00289
- CR IN RE JASON LANG MOD GLING
Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Jason Lang Modgling, a prison inmate, seeks a mandamus to compel the Honorable Matt Johnson of the 54th District Court to rule on Modgling’s motion for judgment nunc pro tunc. There are numerous procedural problems with this petition including, but not li mited to, that the petition was not served on the respondent, the trial court judge, or the real party in interest, the State, and there is no record containing the documents on which the requested relief is based or certification as required. T EX
. R.
A PP
. P . 9.5; 52.2; 52.3(j),(k); 52.7. However, we use Rule 2 to overlook these and other deficiencies and deny the petition. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 2. Modgling alleges in his petition that he filed his motion for judgment nunc pro tunc on July 21, 2012. Alth ough the need to consider and rule on a properly filed andIn re Modgling Page 2

presented document is ordinarily not a discretionary act but a ministerial one, a trial court is, nevertheless, allowed a reasonable time within which to perform that act. In re
Chavez , 62 S.W.3d 225, 228

- 229 (Tex. App.

— Amarillo 2001, orig. proceeding). We
determine that in this case the trial court has not had a reasonable time to rule. Modgling’s petition is denied.

TOM GRAY Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis , and Justice Scoggins Petition denied Opinion delivered and filed August 23, 2012 Do not publish [OT06]
EXHIBIT 31

                                 CERTIFICATIONS


I, Matthew W. Shankle, certify that:

   1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Advance Display
Technologies, Inc.;

   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. I am 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 I have:

      (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
      disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to
      ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
      including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me 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 my conclusions about
      the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
      the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;

      (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 that has materially affected,
      or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's
      internal control over financial reporting; and

   5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the small
business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business
issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

      (a) All significant deficiencies and material weakness 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: February 23, 2004


/s/ MATTHEW W. SHANKLE
------------------------------------------------
Matthew W. Shankle
President, Chief Executive and Financial Officer
EX-4.7.7



 Exhibit 4.7.7 

CERTIFICATE OF CHANGE OF 

ADDRESS OF TRUSTEE 

(Pursuant to Section 12-3807(e) of the Delaware Statutory Trust Act) 

The undersigned, trustee, in order to change the address of the office of the statutory trusts for which it is trustee, does hereby certify
that: 
 1. The name of the trustee is BNY Mellon Trust of Delaware. 

2. The address in the State of Delaware such trustee has maintained for each of the statutory trusts for which it is a trustee is: Bellevue
Corporate Center, 301 Bellevue Parkway, 3rd Floor, Wilmington, Delaware 19809. 
 3.
The new address in the State of Delaware such trustee is to maintain for each of the statutory trusts for which it is a trustee is to be changed to 301 Bellevue Parkway, 3rd Floor, Wilmington,
Delaware 19809. 
 4. This Certificate of Change of Address of Trustee will be effective as upon filing. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said trustee has caused this Certificate to be executed by its duly authorized officer on this 27th day of March 2014. 
  

					
	BNY MELLON TRUST OF DELAWARE,
	not individually but solely as trustee
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Kristine K. Gullo

		 	Name:	 	Kristine K. Gullo
		 	Title:	 	Vice President
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he H onor abl e A rthurL . A l a r c ón, U ni t e d S t a t e s C i r c ui tJudge f orthe ** N i nth C i r c ui t , s i tt i ng byde s i gna t i on.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on * ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a )( 2 ). A cc o rd in g ly, ap p ellan t’ s r e que s tf oror a l a r gum e nti s de ni e d.

NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T J O H N N Y EA RL EV A N S, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. J E A N N E S . W O O D F O R D , e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 09- 15070 D. C. No . 1 : 0 6 - c v - 0 1 2 5 0 - ALA ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e E a s te rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia A rthurL . A l a r c ón, C i r c ui tJudge , P r e s i di ng ** S ubm i tt e d M a y25, 2010 *** B efo re: C A N B Y , T H O M A S , an dW . F L E T C H E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. J ohnnyE a r l E va ns , aC a l i f orni as t a t e pr i s one r , appe a l s pr o s e f r om the 

# FI LED JU N 22 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 15070 2 d i s tr i c tc o u rt ’ s o r d e rd e n y i n g h i s mo t i o n f o rr e c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n h i s 4 2 U . S. C. § 1 9 8 3 a c tio n a lle g in g v io la tio n s o f h is F ir s t a n dE ig h th A m e n d m e n t r ig h ts . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291. W e r e vi e w f ora n abus e of

di s c r e t i on, L at s haw v . T

rai ne rW or tham & C o. , I

nc . , 452 F . 3d 1097, 1100 ( 9th C i r . 2006) , a nd w e a f f i rm. I n h is m o tio n f

o rr e c o n s id e r a tio n , E v a n s r e p e a te dth e a r g u m e n ts r a is e din h is o p p o siti o n s to th e m o ti o n to d ism iss: th at b o th h is g riev an ce an dciti ze n ’s com pl ai ntsat i sf

i ed the adm i ni stra t i ve exhaust i on re qu i re m entor, i n the al t ernat i ve, tha the w a s e xc us e d f

r om c om pl i a nc e w i th the e xhaus t i on r e qui r e m e nt . T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on byde ny i ng the m ot i on f orr e c ons i de r a t i on be c aus e E va ns f

a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h “ m a ni f e s ti nj us t i c e ” t o w a rr a ntr e l i e f f r om ju d g m e n t. I

d. a t 1 1 0 3 ( e x p la in in g th a t F e d e r a l R u le o f C iv il P r o c e du r e 6 0 ( b ) ( 6 ) “is used spar i ng l y a s an equ i t abl e r em edy t o p re ventm ani fe sti nj ust i ce ” ( i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks and ci t at i on om i tt ed)) . E vans’ s r em ai ni ng cont ent i on s are un pers uasi ve. A F F I R M E D .
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 166 (Friday, August 27, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 52789]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21431]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>12266 and <greek-i>12267]


Texas Disaster Number TX-00361

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 1.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of Texas (FEMA-1931-DR), dated 08/03/2010.
    Incident: Hurricane Alex.
    Incident Period: 06/30/2010 and continuing through 08/14/2010.

DATES: Effective Date: 08/14/2010.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 10/04/2010.
    EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date: 05/03/2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for the State of TEXAS, dated 08/03/2010 is hereby amended 
to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 06/30/
2010 and continuing through 08/14/2010.
    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)


Lisa Lopez-Suarez,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2010-21431 Filed 8-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### DEBORAH LITTLE WOLF v. NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS INSURANCE COMPANY.

June 25, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.