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

<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>       THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
               EXTRACTED FROM THE TRANS ENERGY, INC. FINANCIAL
               STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND
               IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
               FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
<MULTIPLIER>   1
       
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                         JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                           MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                   1,187,038
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                              157,844
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         1,404,483
<PP&E>                                   6,155,906
<DEPRECIATION>                           1,401,470
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           6,381,878
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    1,208,191
<BONDS>                                  2,372,857
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                     3,824
<OTHER-SE>                               8,926,633
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             6,381,878
<SALES>                                    270,716
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           270,716
<CGS>                                       91,170
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              257,036
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          36,315
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (20,990)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (20,990)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                               (20,990)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                (.00)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                 0000770949
<NAME>                Reebok International, Ltd.
<MULTIPLIER>          1,000

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   Sep-30-1999
<CASH>                                         143,060
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  628,997
<ALLOWANCES>                                    49,138
<INVENTORY>                                    449,743
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,304,713
<PP&E>                                         431,658
<DEPRECIATION>                                 254,209
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,634,064
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          665,738
<BONDS>                                        422,564
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           928
<OTHER-SE>                                     544,834
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,634,064
<SALES>                                      2,277,114
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                33,212
<CGS>                                        1,405,035
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,405,035
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               789,324
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,270,892
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 43,321
<INCOME-TAX>                                    17,582
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             25,739
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    25,739
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .45



</TABLE>
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.

  WFRBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2011-C5,
  Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates
  Series 2011-C5 (the "Trust")

  I, Anthony Sfarra, a President of Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage
  Securities, Inc., the depositor into the above-referenced Trust, certify
  that:

  1.I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports Form
    10-D required to be filed in respect of periods included in the year
    covered by this annual report, of the Trust;

  2.Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
    whole, do 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 annual report;

  3.Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other
    information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
    covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

  4.Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required
    in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as
    disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic report, the servicers have
    fulfilled their obligations under the pooling and servicing agreement
    in all material respects; and

  5.All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
    for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on
    assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed
    securities required to be included in this report in accordance with
    Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18
    have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
    disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance
    described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form
    10-K.

    In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
    information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:
    Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee, Midland Loan Services,
    Inc. as Special Servicer and TriMont Real Estate Advisors, Inc. as
    Trust Advisor.

    Dated:   March 27, 2012


    /s/ Anthony Sfarra
    Signature

    President
    (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
#### Alfredo RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Christopher ARTUZ, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 98-2252.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued Dec. 11, 1998.

Decided Dec. 21, 1998.

Marsha R. Taubenhaus, New York City, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Joseph N. Ferdenzi, Assistant District Attorney, Bronx County (Nancy D. Killian, Assistant District Attorney, of counsel), Bronx, New York, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before: WINTER, Chief Judge, JACOBS, and POOLER, Circuit Judges.

*764PER CURIAM:

Alfredo Rodriguez appeals from Judge So-tomayor’s order dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus as untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). Rodriguez contends that application of the one-year statute of limitations in Section 2244 effects an unconstitutional suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. *See*U.S. Const., Art. I, § 9, cl. 2. We affirm for substantially the reasons stated by the district court. *See Rodriguez v. Artuz,*990 F.Supp. 275 (S.D.N.Y.1998).
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 79 (Friday, May 12, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H4916]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

              DISCHARGE PETITIONS--ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS

  The following Members added their names to the following discharge 
petitions:

       Petition 1 by Mr. CHAPMAN on H.R. 125: None.
       Petition 2 by Mr. STOCKMAN on H. Res. 111: None.
       Petition 3 by Mr. VOLKMER on H.R. 920: None.
       Petition 4 by Mr. BRYANT on H. Res. 127: Karen L. Thurman, 
     Lloyd Doggett, Andrew Jacobs, Jr., and Thomas M. Barrett.
```
422 A.2d 1171

#### Commonwealth v. Butler, Appellant.

Submitted August 28, 1979.

W. J. Helzlsouer, for appellant; Robert L. Eberhardt, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before VAN der VOORT, LARSEN and LAVELLE, JJ.*

*

 Justice Rolf Larsen of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, and Judge John E. Lavelle of the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania, are sitting by designation.

The order of the lower court is affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 21, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 57468]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23568]


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

FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL

[Docket No. AS10-4]


Appraisal Subcommittee Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions 
Examination Council.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

    Description: In accordance with Section 1104(b) of Title XI of the 
Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, 
as amended, notice is hereby given that the Appraisal Subcommittee 
(ASC) will meet in closed session:
    Location: FDIC Building, 1776 F Street, NW., Room 4085, Washington, 
DC 20429.
    Date: September 22, 2010.
    Time: Immediately following the ASC open session beginning at 10:30 
a.m.
    Status: Closed.
    Matters to be Considered:
    July 22, 2010 minutes from closed session.
    Preliminary discussion of Compliance Reviews.
    Staff briefing on operational matters.

    Dated: September 16, 2010.
James R. Park,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2010-23568 Filed 9-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
#### Freiburg, Klein & Co. v. Foreman & Ray.

(No. 2708, Op. Book No. 4.)

Appeal from Shackleford County.

Opinion by

Hurt, J.

§ 473. *Trial of the right of property; burden of proof; how far writ of attachment is proof of attaching creditor’s claim. ■*The goods levied upon by the attachment of appellants were in possession of appellees under a bill’ of sale from Smith & Sloan: Appellants proposed to attack this transfer upon the ground of fraud upon creditors, they being such. Upon the trial appellants introduced the attachment and the sheriff’s return on the same. This was all the evidence adduced upon the trial as to indebtedness on the part of Smith & Sloan to appellants. Was the attachment evidence of indebtedness by Smith & Sloan to plaintiffs ? *Held,*that the burden of proof was upon appellants to show the material fact of an existing indebtedness, because to enable the plaintiff to impeach the title of the claimant as fraudulent he must have been a creditor [Pierson v. Tom, 10 Tex. 145], and such proof cannot be made by the attachment. [Noble v. Holmes, 5 Hill (N. Y.), 194; Thornburgh v. Hand, 7 Cal. 554.]

§ 47 4. *Charge of the court as to proof of fraud.*Where the court charged the jury “ that fraud cannot be presumed unless the circumstances upon which it is founded are so clear and strong and pregnant that no other reasonable construction can be drawn from them,” *held*error. If the facts and circumstances adduced in evidence reasonably satisfy the minds of the jury that there was fraud on the creditors of Smith & Sloan, participated in by appellees, this will suffice.

But notwithstanding this error in the charge'appel*220lants cannot complain, because, failing to prove that they were creditors of Smith & Sloan, they could not have legally recovered, though the charge had been correct in all respects.

May 26, 1883.

Affirmed.
News United States Air Force
 Air Force transitions all US military treatment facilities to DHAPublished Nov. 1, 2019
                        
                        
                        Air Force Surgeon General Public Affairs
                **FALLS CHURCH, Va. (AFNS) --**
                This October, U.S.-based Air Force military treatment facilities transferred administration and management to the Defense Health Agency.
Congress directed this transfer in the fiscal year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act. Establishing an integrated Military Health System will standardize health care delivery and business operations across all military treatment facilities.
“DHA will have responsibility for the administration and management of military treatment facilities operations related to delivering the health care benefit,” said Lt. Gen. Dorothy Hogg, Air Force Surgeon General. “The Air Force Medical Service retains our readiness mission, ensuring Airmen are fit to carry out their mission and delivering deployable medical assets to meet combatant commander requirements.”
The Air Force is working closely with DHA to ensure a smooth handoff. The impact to patients and those working at military treatment facilities should be minimal. Patients will continue to receive the same high-quality trusted care.
U.S. military treatment facilities operated by the Army and Navy also transferred to DHA.
“The Air Force is fully committed to the vision of an integrated system of military health and making that process as seamless as possible,” Hogg said.
The Air Force will maintain a direct support relationship with DHA to manage day-to-day operations during the transition. Direct support will continue until DHA meets specific condition-based criteria showing they can manage military treatment facilities on their own.
“This is all about the patient,” said Lt. Gen. Ronald J. Place, DHA director. “It’s about harvesting decades of best practices from across the Army, Navy and Air Force — along with what we can learn from the civilian community — to build a global standard with one focus: make our system better to improve health outcomes that matter to our patients.”
The transition of military treatment facilities to DHA is one of many significant transformation efforts underway in the Air Force Medical Service and across the Military Health System.
“These transformation activities provide us an opportunity to really shape the future of the Air Force Medical Service,” Hogg said. “Our core mission continues to be paramount – providing exceptional, high-quality trusted care and improving the readiness of our Airmen.”LR 



USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



DHA 



Defense Health Agency 



treatment facilities 



Congress 



2017 National Defense Authorization Act 



impact to patients 



Air Force Medical Service 



Military Health System 



medical 



Air Force Surgeon General 



healthcare 



Army 



Navy
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5


<LEGEND>
              NATIONAL DIVERSIFIED SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                      EXHIBIT 27 - FINANCIAL STATEMENT DATA

     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S  UNAUDITED  BALANCE  SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER  30, 1999 AND  UNAUDITED
STATEMENT  OF  OPERATIONS  FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED  SEPTEMBER  30, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    sep-30-1999
<CASH>                                  254,770
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                           0
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        257,952
<PP&E>                                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          257,952
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   5,569
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                                6,554
<OTHER-SE>                              187,079
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            257,952
<SALES>                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        9,830
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        14,002
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         (4,172)
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     (4,172)
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                            (4,172)
<EPS-BASIC>                             0
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0



</TABLE>
<page>

EXHIBIT 32.1


                                CERTIFICATION OF
               CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Strasbaugh (the
"Company") for the period ended March 31, 2009 (the "Report"), the undersigned
hereby certify in their capacities as Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to their knowledge:

         1. the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

         2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


Dated:  May 19, 2009                By: /S/ CHUCK SCHILLINGS
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                           Chuck Schillings
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
                                           (principal executive officer)


Dated:  May 19, 2009                By: /S/ RICHARD NANCE
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                            Richard Nance
                                            Chief Financial Officer
                                            (principal financial officer)

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 19-60941

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

John Riley, also known as P. J., 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 1:08-CR-92-1

Before Barksdale, Graves, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

John Riley, federal prisoner # 15081-043, challenges the district 

court’s order denying his motion for resentencing under the First Step Act 

of 2018, § 404, Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194, 5222 (2018). Riley 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 8, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 19-60941 Document: 00515665508 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/08/2020
No. 19-60941

2

contends: his motion did not receive a complete review on the merits; and 

the order denying his motion lacked any explanation or review of his claim.

A district court’s discretionary denial of relief under Section 404 of 

the First Step Act is, generally, reviewed for abuse of discretion. United 

States v. Jackson, 945 F.3d 315, 319 (5th Cir. 2019). 

On limited remand, the district court explained that it had denied 

Riley’s motion for resentencing because his sentence “has previously been 

reduced by all applicable guideline amendments”. Insofar as Riley maintains 

the court failed to consider the merits of his motion for a sentence reduction, 

his contention fails. Id. at 321–22 (denying motion for reduced sentence 

under § 404 because, inter alia, “[defendant] had his day in court. He filed a 

detailed motion explaining why he should get a new sentence; the 

government responded; the court denied the motion; and, on limited 

remand, it explained why. . . . The procedures here were blameless”.). 

Alternatively, if Riley is challenging the court’s reasoning for its 

denial, his contention is waived for inadequate briefing. See Fed. R. App. P. 

28(a)(8)(A); United States v. Reagan, 596 F.3d 251, 254 (5th Cir. 2010) ( “a 

failure to brief . . . constitutes waiver”). He claims his motion “never 

received a complete review on the merits as required”. As discussed above, 

on limited remand, the court provided an adequate explanation for its denial. 

(In addition, he concedes his claims lack merit. See Jackson, 945 F.3d at 321–

22.) 

AFFIRMED.

Case: 19-60941 Document: 00515665508 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/08/2020
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Enabling Bioanalytical and Imaging  Technologies Study Section, October 7, 2010, 8:30 a.m. to October 8, 2010, 5 p.m., The Westin  St Francis Hotel, 400 West Broadway, San Diego, CA, 92101 which was published in the                     **Federal  Register**                     on September 13, 2010, 75 FR 55593-55594.                

The meeting will be held at The Westin St. Francis, 335 Powell Street, San Francisco, CA 94102. The meeting dates and time remain the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

Dated: September 14, 2010.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-23539 Filed 9-20-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P