alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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.                  

###### Postal Regulatory Commission

# TIME AND DATE:

Wednesday, October 6, 2010 at 11 a.m.

# PLACE:

Commission hearing room, 901 New York Avenue, NW., Suite 200, Washington, DC 20268-0001.

# STATUS:

Most items on the agenda will be considered in a session open to public observation. Several items will be considered in a session closed to public observation. The open session will be audiocast.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

# PORTIONS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC:

1. Review of postal-related congressional activity.

2. Report on international activities.

3. Review of active cases.

4. Report on recent activites of the Joint Periodicals Task Force and status of the report to the Congress pursuant to secton 708 of the PAEA. 

5. Report on the October 1 budgetary meeting at OMB.

6. Report on vacancies and positions recently filled.

# PORTIONS CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC:

7. Discussion of pending litigation.

8. Discussion of confidential personnel issues.

9. Discussion of contracts involving confidential commercial information.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

                        Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, Postal Regulatory Commission, at 202-789-6820 or                         *stephen.sharfman@prc.gov*                         (for questions concerning the agenda) and Shoshana M. Grove at 202-789-6842 or                         *shoshana.grove@prc.gov*                         (for questions concerning audiocasting or matters related to public observation).                    

*Dated:*                         September 24, 2010.                    

Shoshana M. Grove,

*Secretary*.                    

[FR Doc. 2010-24396 Filed 9-24-10; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 7710-FW-S
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>            5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated statements of financial condition and the consolidated
statements of operation of Unified Financial Services, Inc. filed as
part of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended
December 31, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
report.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       5,709,082
<SECURITIES>                                13,042,558
<RECEIVABLES>                               12,020,890
<ALLOWANCES>                                    71,326
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            30,533,154
<PP&E>                                       5,858,108
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,913,498
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              36,748,994
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       21,457,522
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                        33,294
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                36,748,994
<SALES>                                     25,617,592
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            25,617,592
<CGS>                                        7,280,386
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,280,386
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            19,916,479
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                33,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             160,343
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,743,185)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    29,730
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,772,915)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,772,915)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (.62)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.60)


</TABLE>
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 1482

JACOB QUEERN,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY, (DLA), et al,

Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk

. Rebecca Beach Smith, Senior District Judge. ( 2:19

- cv

- 00485

- RBS

- LRL )

Submitted : October 19, 2021 Decided: October 21, 2021

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, AGEE , Circuit Judge , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Jacob E. Queern , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Jacob E. Queern seeks to appeal the district court’s order directing the clerk to

terminate several of his motions and reinstate them upon resolution of his multiple

interlocutory appeals. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28

U. S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R.

Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541, 545

- 46 (1949). The

order Queern seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interloc utory or

collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and deny

Queern’s pending motions . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court a nd argument would

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### STATE of Louisiana v. George TOCA.

No. 2011-KP-1214.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 16, 2011.

In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 301-875; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2010-K-1451.

Not considered. Untimely. See Supreme Court Rule X, Section 5(a).
#### Sidney McHenry v. L. D. Curtis.

(No. 4012.)

Appeal from Eastland County.

*(Transferred from Austin.)*

R. B. Truly, B. F. Cotton and J. M. Morgan, counsel for appellant.

No counsel appeared for appellee.

Opinion by

White, P. J.

§ 269. *Forcible entry; complaint in; sufficiency of; case stated.*This is an action of forcible entry and, detainer brought by appellant against appellee in justice’s court and taken by appeal to the county court. In substance, the complaint alleged that, on the 17th of November, 1881, plaintiff was actually seized and possessed, under a contract of lease from defendant, of one hundred and sixty acres of land, describing said land with particularity; that on said date defendant unlawfully, forcibly, and without plaintiff’s consent, entered upon said premises and ejected plaintiff therefrom, and that defendant withholds and refuses to surrender the same to plaintiff though the latter had made written demand of the defendant therefor. On motion of appellee, in the county court, this complaint was adjudged insufficient, and the *328suit was dismissed. *'Held*error. The complaint stated a cause of action against a landlord for “forcible entry” as the same is defined by statute. [R. S. art. 2441, subd. 2.] It is in substantial compliance with the statute prescribing the requisites of such a complaint. [R. S. art. 2445; Warren v. Francis, 17 Tex. 544; Cooper v. Marchbanks, 22 Tex. 1.]

February 26, 1887.

Reversed and remanded.
EXHIBIT 14.1



Code of Ethical Conduct for Senior Financial Officers



In my role as the principal executive officer, principal financial officer, or principal accounting officer or controller, or a person
performing similar functions (collectively, Senior Financial Officers) of U.S. Restaurant Properties, Inc. (the Company),



I recognize that I hold an important and elevated role in corporate governance. I am uniquely capable and empowered to ensure that shareholders interests are
appropriately balanced, protected and preserved. Accordingly, this Code provides principles to which Senior Financial Officers are expected to adhere and advocate. This Code embodies rules regarding individual and peer responsibilities, as well as
responsibilities to the Company, the public and shareholders.



I certify that I
adhere to and advocate the following principles and responsibilities governing my professional and ethical conduct:



1. I act honestly and ethically, including ethically handling actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships.



2. I act to ensure full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable disclosure in reports and
documents that the Company files with, or submits to, the Securities and Exchange Commission and in other public communications made by the Company.



3. I comply with applicable governmental laws, rules and regulations.



4. I act in good faith, responsibly and with due care and diligence, without misrepresenting material facts or allowing my independent judgment to be subordinated.



5. I do not disclose any confidential information acquired in the course of my
work, except when authorized or when I am legally obligated to disclose such information. I do not use such confidential information for personal advantage.



6. I comply with the Companys Code of Business Conduct and Ethics for all employees.



7. I promptly report to the Chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee any conduct that I believe to be a violation of
law or business ethics or of any provision of this Code or the Companys Code of Conduct and Ethics, including any transaction or relationship that reasonably could be expected to give rise to such a violation.



I understand that violations of this Code of Ethical Conduct for Senior Financial Officers,
including failures to report actual or potential violations by others, will be viewed as a severe disciplinary matter that may result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment.



|                        |  |            |  |                            
|----------------------- |  | ---------- |  | ---------------------------
|Date: February 24, 2005 |  | Signature: |  | /s/ Robert J. Stetson      
|                        |  |            |  | Principal Executive Officer
Exhibit
      32.1





Certification
      of Periodic Financial Report


Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350




Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of
      the
      undersigned officers of RC2 Corporation (the "Company") certifies that the
      Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2007
      fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
      Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-K fairly presents, in
      all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.




Dated:
      February 29, 2008




/s/
      Curtis W.
      Stoelting


Curtis
      W.
      Stoelting


Chief
      Executive Officer







Dated:
      February 29, 2008




/s/
      Jody L.
      Taylor


Jody
      L.
      Taylor


Chief
      Financial Officer







This
      certification is made solely for
      purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained
      therein, and not for any other purpose.
Order filed November 1, 2018 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-18-00281-CV

____________

IN THE INTEREST OF M. E. H.

On Appeal from the 345th District Court

Travis County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. D-1-AG-15-002375

ORDER

In response to our order of October 30, 2018, court reporter Laura Taylor has 

informed the court that the reporter’s record is complete. 

Accordingly, appellant’s brief is due by December 03, 2018. Tex. R. App. P. 

38.6(a)(2).

PER CURIAM
583 A.2d 307

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. DAVID G. RICCIO.

January 23, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1485 

AN ACT 

For the relief of Esther Karinge. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 1485 EH

1 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR ESTHER 

2 KARINGE. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) 

4 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality 

5 Act, Esther Karinge shall be eligible for issuance of an 

6 immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of an 

7 alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon fil8 ing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under 

9 section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to 

10 lawful permanent resident. 

11 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Esther Karinge 

12 enters the United States before the filing deadline speci13 fied in subsection (c), she shall be considered to have en14 tered and remained lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligible, 

15 be eligible for adjustment of status under section 245 of 

16 the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of the 

17 enactment of this Act. 

18 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

19 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap20 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica21 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees 

22 within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

23 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.— 

24 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res25 idence to Esther Karinge, the Secretary of State shall in26 struct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the current 
3 

•HR 1485 EH

1 or next following fiscal year, the total number of immi2 grant visas that are made available to natives of the coun3 try of the alien’s birth under section 203(a) of the Immi4 gration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the total 

5 number of immigrant visas that are made available to na6 tives of the country of the alien’s birth under section 

7 202(e) of such Act. 

8 (e) DENIAL OF PREFERENTIAL IMMIGRATION

9 TREATMENT FOR CERTAIN RELATIVES.—The natural 

10 parents, brothers, and sisters of Esther Karinge shall not, 

11 by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any right, privi12 lege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 16, 

2008. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1485 

AN ACT 

For the relief of Esther Karinge.
#### Harry S. SHAPIRO, Trustee for Spring Valley Country Club, Inc., Appellant, v. Abe S. KAY et al., Appellees.

No. 9195.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued Jan. 23, 1964.

Decided May 18, 1964.

Eli Baer, Washington, D. C., for appellant.

Michael A. Schuchat, Washington, D. C., for appellee.

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

PER CURIAM:

This ease involved nothing except certain questions of fact with respect to the validity of certain mortgages and whether or not, if valid, the total due on such mortgages exceeded the value of the property subject to the mortgages, thus justifying the decision of the Referee to abandon the properties and permit sale under the mortgages. These factual questions were decided in the affirmative by the Referee and affirmed by the District Judge on petition for review. The evidence is ample to support the findings and the decision of the Referee and the decision of the District Court is therefore:

Affirmed.
#### Jean Mary MAVERICK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D11-1990.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 17, 2011.

Rhonda F. Gelfman, North Miami Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Shayne R. Burnham, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before ROTHENBERG, LAGOA, and EMAS, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See Hernandez v. State,*61 So.3d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011).
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 11.1
                                METATOOLS, INC.
                                ---------------

                      STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF
                          NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE

                     (in thousands, except per share data)
<TABLE> 
<CAPTION>  
                                             THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                  MARCH 31,
                                             ------------------
                                              1997        1996
                                             ------      ------
<S>                                          <C>         <C>          
PRIMARY AND FULLY DILUTED (1)
 
Weighted average shares outstanding for      13,275      11,634
 the period.............................
Common equivalent shares................        960       1,420
                                             ------      ------
Shares used in per share calculation....     14,235      13,054
                                             ======      ======
  
Net income..............................     $   81      $  724
                                             ======      ======
 
Net income per common share.............     $  .01      $  .06
                                             ======      ======
 
</TABLE>
(1)  Primary and fully diluted calculations are substantially the same.
#### STATE ex rel. Henry HICKSON v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2010-KH-1182.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 2011.

In re Hickson, Henry; —Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 16689-95; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 09-01522.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; *State ex rel. Glover v. State,*93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; *State v. Parker,*98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694.
Ex.
10.66





THIRD
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT OF SALE








THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT OF
SALE (“Third Amendment”) is dated effective this 15th day of March, 2007 and is
executed by and between THE SUMMIT AT WINTER PARK LAND CO., LLC (“Seller”) and
SILVERLEAF RESORTS, INC. (“Purchaser”).








W
I T N E S S E T H:





WHEREAS, Seller and Purchaser have
entered into that certain Contract of Sale with effective date of May 1, 2006
relating to Tracts D, E, F, and G, The Summit at Winter Park Ranch, Grand
County, Colorado, which Contract was subsequently amended pursuant to (i) that
certain Amendment to Contract of Sale dated June 26, 2006, and executed by and
between Seller and Purchaser and (ii) that certain Second Amendment to Contract
of Sale dated February, 2007, and executed by and between Seller and Purchaser
(hereinafter the “Contract”); and





WHEREAS, Seller and Purchaser have
agreed to modify the Contract as set forth hereinbelow;





NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the
premises and the mutual covenants herein set forth, and for other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
acknowledged by Seller and Purchaser, Seller and Purchaser hereby agree as
follows:





1.           Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary contained in the Contract, Seller and Purchaser hereby
agree that the second non-refundable extension fee in the amount of $100,000.00
which is payable by Purchaser to Seller in order to obtain a second thirty (30)
day extension of the deadline for the closing of the Contract, i.e. for the
purpose of extending the deadline for the closing of the Contract from March 28,
2007 to April 27, 2007, shall be applied in
partial satisfaction of the purchase price payable under the
Contract.




2.           Except
as amended and modified herein, the Contract continues in full force and
effect.  Unless otherwise defined herein, capitalized terms used
herein shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Contract.





3.           The
parties may execute this Amendment in counterparts, each of which shall
constitute an original and all of which, when taken together, shall constitute
one and the same instrument.





IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller and Purchaser have executed this Amendment as of the day
and year first above written.


1





SELLER:SUMMIT
      AT WINTER PARK LAND CO., LLC,Colorado
      limited liability companyBy:
            Developing
      Equities Group, LLC,Operating
      ManagerBy:
            /S/ JEFFREY L.
KIRKENDALLName:
            Jeffrey L. KirkendallIts:
            ManagerPURCHASER:SILVERLEAF
      RESORTS, INC.,a
      Texas corporationBy:
            /S/ ROBERT E. MEADName:
            Robert E. MeadIts:
            CEO






2
### NUM BER 1 3-08 -006 63-CV 

## C O U R T O F AP P E AL S T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS C O R P U S C H R I S T I - E D I N B U R G

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ SA N BENI TO E CONOM IC DEVELO PM ENT CORPORA TION, A ppell ant,
v. CHRISTOP HER HA M BY A ND H20 CONSTRUCTION, I NC., A ppell ees.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ On a ppeal fr om the 103r d Di str ic t Cour t of Cam er on County , Texas.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 

## MEMORA NDU M OPI NION Before J usti ces Yañez , Benavides and Ve la M emor andum O pini on Per Cur ia m App ellant , San Ben ito Econ om ic Developm ent Co rp o ra t ion, perf ecte d an app eal f rom a judgme nt ent ered by the 103 rd District Court of Cam eron Coun ty, T exas, in cause
num ber 200 7-01 -002 6-D. T he partie s have f iled a joint mo tion to dism iss w ith p re judiceon gr oun ds tha t all ma tters in cont rov ersy bet w een the m in this cause have bee n f ully

com prom ised a nd settle d. T he partie s request tha t this Court dism iss this case w ith prejud ice to ea ch p arty re-filing the sam e o r any part t here of

. T he Court, having consid ered the docu me nts on f ile and the joint mo tion to dism iss
w ith prejud ice, is of the opin ion tha t the mo tion shou ld be gr ant ed. See T E X
. R. A P P
. P. 42. 1(a). T h e jo int mo tion to dism iss is gr ant ed, and the app eal is here by DISMISSE D W IT H PREJUDICE. Cos ts w ill be taxed against app ellant

. See T E X
. R. A P P
. P. 42. 1(d) ("Ab sent agreem ent of the partie s, the court w ill tax costs against the app ellant ."). Havi ng dism issed t he app eal a t th e partie s’ request, no mo tion f or rehe aring w ill be e nte rtaine d, and ou r ma nda te will issue f orthwith. P ER CURIAM Deliv ered an d f iled th e 4th da y of March, 2 010

.

2