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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           5,614
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   34,927
<ALLOWANCES>                                       613
<INVENTORY>                                    162,788
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               209,429
<PP&E>                                          81,287
<DEPRECIATION>                                  22,255
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 274,553
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           45,912
<BONDS>                                         60,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        18,359
<OTHER-SE>                                     157,257
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   274,553
<SALES>                                        240,640
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               240,640
<CGS>                                          132,820
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  223,880
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,100
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 937
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,723
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,630
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,093
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,093
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.33
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7435

WINCHAUS HAYES,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Defendant – Appellee,

and

ERIC D. WILSON, Warden; CHARLES E. SAMUELS, Director, FBOP; 

(MR.) LAWSON, Supervisor,

 Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District 

Judge. (2:14-cv-00532-RAJ-LRL)

Submitted: December 15, 2016 Decided: December 20, 2016

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Winchaus Angelo Hayes, Appellant Pro Se. Virginia Lynn Van 

Valkenburg, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, 

for Appellee.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Winchaus Angelo Hayes appeals the district court’s order 

denying relief on his complaint. We have reviewed the record 

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. Hayes v. United States, 

No. 2:14-cv-00532-RAJ-LRL (E.D. Va. Aug. 10, 2016). We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
News United States Air Force
 Eagle Eyes program encourages Airmen to watch, report, protectPublished Sept. 28, 2016
                        
                        By Jason Heavner
                        
                        
                        341st Missile Wing Public Affairs
                **MALMSTROM AIR FORCE BASE, Mont. (AFNS) --**
                With acts of terrorism always a possibility, it’s every Airman’s duty to remain vigilant and report suspicious activity when they see it. That’s where the Eagle Eyes program plays a vital role in protecting personnel and Defense Department assets.
The program, which is administered by the Office of Special Investigation, puts Airmen and their families as well as local authorities on the anti-terrorism team by being the eyes and ears of the community and knowing what to do in the event of witnessing any behavior that’s out of the ordinary.
“Basically, the program is the neighborhood watch of the Air Force,” said Justin Colwell, an OSI special agent. “We ask that when you see something suspicious, you say something. It focuses on the need to report on any suspicious activity. It goes with our mission objective, which is stopping any terrorist activity before it happens.” 
According to OSI’s website, examples of suspicious activity include someone recording or monitoring activities; people or organizations attempting to gain information about military operations whether it’s through mail, fax, internet or in person; someone or an organization testing security by making attempts to measure reaction times to security breaches in order to assess strengths and weaknesses; suspicious persons out of place, could be people who don’t seem to belong in a certain workplace, neighborhood, business establishment or anywhere else; people acquiring supplies, such as purchasing or stealing explosives, weapons, ammunition, timers or detonators. Other examples of supplies include uniforms, badges, flight manuals, or any other controlled items. Other indicators of suspicious activity are witnessing people being put into position, mapping out routes and/or monitoring the timing of traffic lights, which would be sign of terrorists performing a dry run or in the process of deploying hostile assets.
Having mission essential facilities located throughout the world, OSI and the Air Force are in constant communication with local authorities and Colwell agreed that the partnership is key to keeping Airmen, the citizens and assets safe. 
“With communication being constant, our relationship with the community remains strong and we want to keep it that way,” Colwell said.    
In the event of witnessing any suspicious activities, Airmen, DOD personnel and their families are encouraged to report it. To see how to make a report, click here.Eagle Eyes 



surveillance 



neighborhood watch 



anti-terrorism 



OSI
SENIOR FINANCIAL OFFICERS
                                CODE OF ETHICS

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY

The chief executive officer and the chief financial officer (collectively
"Senior Financial Officers") are responsible for the integrity of EAutoclaims's
financial reporting and system of internal accounting and controls. The honesty,
integrity and sound judgment of each Senior Financial Officer is fundamental to
the reputation and success of EAutoclaims.

While all employees, officers, and directors are required to adhere to the
EAutoclaims, Inc. Code of Ethics, the professional and ethical conduct of Senior
Financial Officers is essential to the proper function and success of
EAutoclaims as a leading merchant services provider.

SENIOR FINANCIAL OFFICERS CODE OF ETHICS

To the best of their knowledge and ability, each Senior Financial Officer of
EAutoclaims must:

     (i) Act with honesty and integrity, avoid actual or apparent conflicts of
interest in personal and professional relationships.

     (ii) Provide colleagues with information that is accurate, complete,
objective, relevant, timely and understandable.

     (iii) Comply with applicable laws, rules and regulations of federal, state,
and local governments (both United States and foreign) and other appropriate
private and public regulatory agencies.

     (iv) Act in good faith, with due care, competence and diligence, without
misrepresenting material facts or allowing independent judgment to be
subordinated.

     (v) Respect the confidentiality of information acquired in the course of
employment.

     (vi) Share knowledge and maintain skills necessary and relevant to
EAutoclaims's needs.

     (vii) Proactively promote ethical and honest behavior within the
EAutoclaims environment.

     (viii) Assure responsible use of and control of all assets, resources and
information of EAutoclaims.

     Each Senior Financial Officer is expected to adhere to the Code of Ethics
for Senior Financial Officers at all times. The board of directors shall have
the sole and absolute authority to approve any deviation or waiver from the Code
of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers. Any waiver and the grounds for such
waiver for a Senior Financial Officer shall be promptly disclosed through a
filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Form 8-K. Additionally,
any change of this Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers shall be
promptly disclosed to shareholders.
#### A. J. Ross v. J. H. McGuffin.

(No. 1828.)

Appeal from Hunt County.

Opinion by

White, P. J.

§ 458. *Jurisdiction of county court; amount in controversy; when fraudulent attempt to confer jurisdiction is*alleged, *the record must present evidence in support of such allegation.*Ross, as sheriff, by virtue of an execution against McGuffin, levied upon and took possession of a lot of oats in the shock, belonging to McGuffin, and which had been grown upon McGuffin’s homestead, and were upon said homestead at the time of said seizure. *404McGuffin brought this suit against Ross*to recover said oats, or the alleged value thereof, and also to recover $300 damages for the wrongful seizure of the same, alleging that said oats were necessary for the enjoyment and beneficial use of his homestead, etc. Appellant pleaded to the jurisdiction of the county court, alleging that the real amount in controversy was only $50, the alleged value of the oats, and that the claim of plaintiff of $300 damages was a fraudulent attempt by said plaintiff to confer jurisdiction upon said court improperly. *Held,*the amount claimed in plaintiff’s petition is the amount in controversy, and is within the jurisdiction of the court, and there is no evidence of a fraudulent or improper attempt to give jurisdiction, apparent upon the face of the petition, or shown by the record. The court did not err in overruling the plea to the jurisdiction.

§ 459. *Interest; judgment for.*The judgment was in appellee’s favor for $50, together with legal interest thereon from the date of said judgment. This was not error, notwithstanding there was no prayer in 'appellee’s petition for interest. The judgment would bear legal interest from its date without any recital therein to that effect. Appellant could avoid the accrual of interest by promptly paying the judgment.

§ 460. *Conversion of property; sufficient allegations of, in petition.*It was alleged in the petition that the property seized by appellant was exempt from levy and forced sale, and that appellant “unlawfully took possession of said oats, and deprived plaintiff of the use and enjoyment of the same.” This was sufficient. “Every unlawful taking is a conversion.” It was not necessary, under the circumstances, to allege a demand and refusal. [W. & W. Con. Rep. §§ 249, 250.]

§ 461. *Crops are exempt property, when; when exempt, it is unlawful to seize them under execution.*Crops grown upon' the homestead, and necessary to its beneficial use and enjoyment, are exempt from forced sale. [Alexander v. Holt, 59 Tex. 205.] If exempt, it is un*405lawful to seize and sell them under execution, and if so seized by an officer, he is liable for their conversion.

November 26, 1884.

Affirmed.
News United States Air Force
 Enroll newborns in TRICARE within 60 days of birthPublished May 12, 2015
                        
                        By Master Sgt. Carolyn Stewart
                        
                        
                        14th Medical Support Squadron
                **COLUMBUS AIR FORCE BASE, Miss. --**
                Service members are reminded to enroll their newborns into TRICARE within 60 days of birth or 120 days in overseas areas.
When newborns are not enrolled within the first 60 days of birth, this can cause claims processing issues and parents incur costly out-of-pocket expenses.
Members who want their newborns to have TRICARE Prime coverage must call or send an enrollment form within 60 days of birth. Adopted or birth newborns born to a TRICARE Prime enrolled parent is automatically covered under TRICARE Prime for the first 60 days. Thereafter, if an enrollment form is not submitted by day 61 of birth, the newborn's coverage is converted to TRICARE Standard.
Adding a family member in the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) does not mean they are also enrolled in TRICARE. Newborns will continue to receive TRICARE Standard coverage for 365 days, whether enrolled in DEERS or not. On day 366, newborns not enrolled in DEERS will no longer be eligible for TRICARE Standard. 
Coverage is different for families covered under TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) and TRICARE Retired Reserve (TRR). Newborns are not automatically covered under TRS and TRR. A TRS and TRR application must be submitted within 60 days of birth to receive retroactive TRS and TRR coverage. If an application is sent after 60 days, coverage for the newborn will not be backdated and the family is responsible for the care the newborn received in the first 60 days. 
Ensure you are submitting enrollment forms for all eligible family members for coverage and to eliminate costly out-of-pocket expenses. 
For DEERS registration sponsors will need a certificate of live birth from the hospital or birth certificate, and the child's social security card. 
For more information on newborn or adopted child TRICARE Prime enrollment or any TRICARE coverage plan, please call 1-800-444-5445 or go to **www.tricare.mil**.DEERS 



enrollment 



newborn 



Columbus AFB 



AETC 



TRICARE
#### STATE of Louisiana, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, in the Interest of P.B. v. Michael REED.

No. 2010-C-2611.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 18, 2011.

In re Reed, Michael; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, Jefferson Parish Juvenile Court, No. 2007-NS-1169; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 10-CA-410.

Denied.

KNOLL, J., would grant.
**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**

 

 

I, David M. Bronson, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of PSS World Medical, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify that the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 29, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the  “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

/s/ David M. Bronson

David M. Bronson

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

 

November 8, 2006
#### James J. Norton et al. v. The County of Galveston.

(No. 2202.)

Appeal from Galveston County.

John Love joy, for appellants.

Prank M. Spencer, for appellee.

Opinion by

White, P. J.

§ 239. *Bond of hirer of county convict; conditions in; case stated.*Appellee recovered judgment against appellants upon a bond given for the hire of a county convict. It is contended that the bond is invalid, 1, because it is not conditioned that the convict should remain in the county of conviction; 2, because it stipulates that the term of service of said convict should be for a specified time at a specified rate, instead of for a term of service “in no event to be greater than one day for each fifty cents of fine and costs and 3, because the conditions of the bond are more onerous than those prescribed by the statute, in that they bind the obligors to pay the whole penalty, if any one month’s hire should not be paid, notwithstanding the statute provides that fifty cents per day shall be a settlement of so much of the fine and costs each day the convict is hired, and that the hirer is entitled to this credit, etc. *Held:*There might be some force in these objections to the bond if we looked alone to article 3G02 of the Revised Statutes as amended by act of 17th Leg. p. 16. The amendatory act, however, relates alone to article 3602, and in no manner changes article 3601 of the Revised Statutes, which prescribes each and every requisite of the bond required to be given by the hirer of a convict. The bond sued upon contains every requisite prescribed by said article 3601, and is a valid statutory bond. That the bond fails to stipulate that the convict shall remain in the county where hired does not invalidate it. While article 3602, as amended, requires that *292the convict shall be hired out to remain in the county where hired, it does not require that the bond shall so stipulate, and hence does not alter the conditions of the bond as prescribed by article 3604. But even if the bond should have contained this stipulation, its omission would be to the advantage of the obligors, and they could not object to the validity of the bond upon that ground. [W. & W. Con. Rep. § 820.]

February 19, 1887.

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 10.601

Amendment No.1 to Licensing Agreement with
                                  World Channel, Inc.



Amendment No.1

to

Licensing Agreement

This Amendment No.1 to the Licensing Agreement is made on the
19th day of February, 2001,

Between 	American Champion Media, Inc. (The Licensor)

22320 Foothill Blvd., Suite 260

Hayward, CA 94541

And		World Channel Inc. (The Licensee)

131 So. Maple Ave., Suite 6

So. San Francisco, CA 94080

WHEREBY IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED as follows:

Clause 6 shall be changed to read as following:



6.	The Licensee shall pay to the Licensor in consideration of the right
granted under this Agreement a Licensing Fee of US$3,000,000 in total. The
Licensee shall make the first payment of $300,000 by March 31, 2001 and the
second payment of $300,000 by September 30, 2001. Thereafter the Licensee shall
pay to the Licensor four annual installment payments of US$600,000 each on or
before the end of the years 2002 through 2005.

Licensee shall pledge the amount of $800,000 in its appraised
value of company equipment as collateral for the above payments. In the event
that Licensee fails to make the License Fee payments to Licensor on time,
Licensor should notice Licensee in writing and has the right to liquidate
Licensee's pledged equipment to compensate for the lost of License Fee, and
Licensor may terminate this Agreement with a 30-day written notice.



All other clauses and terms shall remain unchanged.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have duly executed this Amendment No. 1
to the Agreement as of the day and year first above written by affixing their
respective corporate seals under the hands of their proper signing officers duly
authorized on that behalf.



|For and on behalf of
American Champion Media, Inc.              | For and on behalf of
World Channel Inc.
|--------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------
|By: /s/ Anthony K. Chan
Anthony K. Chan
Chief Executive Officer | By: /s/ Alan Mok
Alan Mok
President    

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<CIK>                           0001034237
<NAME>                          AEROCENTURY IV, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                    1
<CURRENCY>                      US DOLLARS

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                           1,284,580
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      242,940
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,527,520
<PP&E>                                           1,950,650
<DEPRECIATION>                                     460,640
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,355,700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              427,650
<BONDS>                                          4,869,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           243,420
<OTHER-SE>                                      (2,184,370)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,355,700
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   533,260
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,572,610
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 486,900
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,526,250)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       225,520
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,751,770)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,751,770)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (7.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (7.20)



</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

March 29, 2002



Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549-0408



Ladies and Gentlemen:

This letter is written pursuant to Temporary Note 3T to Article 3 of Regulation
S-X. Waypoint Financial Corp. and subsidiaries (the "Corporation") has received
a representation letter from Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen") stating that the
audit of consolidated balance sheets of the Corporation as of December 31, 2001
and 2000, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders'
equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December
31, 2001, was subject to Andersen's quality control system for the U.S.
accounting and auditing practice to provide reasonable assurance that the
engagement was conducted in compliance with professional standards and that
there was appropriate continuity of Andersen personnel working on the audit, and
availability of national office consultation to conduct the relevant portions of
the audit.

                                                  Very truly yours,


                                                  /s/ James H. Moss
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  James H. Moss,
                                                  Chief Financial Officer

                                       89