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

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997             JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997             JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         226,312                  39,469
<SECURITIES>                                 1,594,382                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     99,107                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,929,011                  39,469
<PP&E>                                         342,679                  50,447
<DEPRECIATION>                                  47,286                  17,697
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,382,977                 132,307
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          549,954                 115,415
<BONDS>                                        265,836                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          125,000                       0
<PREFERRED>                                      6,318                       0
<COMMON>                                           920                      44
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,410,198               (372,664)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,382,977                 132,307
<SALES>                                          9,799                   7,756
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,799                   7,756
<CGS>                                            2,200                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,200                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,721,925                 368,068
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              58,989                   9,338
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,676,270)               (369,650)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,676,270)               (369,650)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,676,270)               (369,650)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.92)                  (0.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.92)                  (0.40)
        

</TABLE>
#### Hector L. RIVERA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 5D10-4394.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

March 18, 2011.

Hector L. Rivera, Raiford, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Megan Saillant, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

The trial court summarily denied Appellant’s motion without attaching records or providing reasons. Perhaps the trial court believed the motion was successive because of the way Appellant labeled his motion. It is neither successive nor untimely. It is facially insufficient, however, but Appellant should have been given an opportunity to amend the motion. *Spera v. State,*971 So.2d 754 (Fla.2007). The State properly concedes error.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

SAWAYA, TORPY and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ABR
INFORMATION SERVICES, INC FORM 10-Q FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED APRIL 30, 1997,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1997
<CASH>                                      30,448,880
<SECURITIES>                               128,418,412
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,292,012
<ALLOWANCES>                                    56,212
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           168,368,713
<PP&E>                                      25,089,660
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,312,469
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             217,797,814
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       25,262,394
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       273,745
<OTHER-SE>                                 190,317,275
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               217,797,814
<SALES>                                     35,292,409
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            35,292,409
<CGS>                                       19,709,259
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,243,626
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          (5,504,243)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             13,843,767
<INCOME-TAX>                                 5,111,354
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          8,732,413
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 8,732,413
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .32
        

</TABLE>
(logo) Rialto 

         CAPITAL

 

 

**2017****Annual****Statement****of****Servicer Compliance****(Item 1123)**

 

Pooling andServicing Agreement (the "Pooling and Servicing Agreement") datedas of March 1, 2014 byand among Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Master Servicer, Rialto CapitalAdvisors, LLC as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank National Association asTrustee, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian andSitus Holdings,LLC as Operating Advisor relating to the Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation, COMM 2014-LC15 Mortgage Trust, CommercialMortgage Pass-ThroughCertificates **(COMM****2014-LCl5)**

 

Theundersigned, aduly authorizedofficer ofRialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as special servicer (the "Special Servicer")herein ce1tifies to the following:

 

I.     Allservicing activities and performance of such servicingactivities underthe Poolingand ServicingAgreement areperformedon behalfof the SpecialServicer.

 

2.     Areview oftheservicingactivitiesandperformancebytheSpecialServicerfortheperiod ofJanuaryI, 2017 to December 31, 2017 (the "Reporting Period") in accordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been conducted under mysupervision.

 

3.     To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations underthetermsofthePooling andServicingAgreement,inallmaterialrespectsfortheReportingPeriod and if there has been a failureto fulfill any such obligations inany materialrespect, each failure and the nature and status thereof hasbeen specifically identified herein.

 

 

Certified by: /s/ AdamSinger                                                                

Adam Singer, ManagingDirector    

 

Date: March 1, 2018
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**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 Consolidated Graphics, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2004, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Joe R. Davis, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

(1)           TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          Informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated:   February2, 2005

 

 
|   | /s/ Joe R. Davis                                                |   |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Joe R. Davis                                                    |
|   | Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive  Officer |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1376

LYNNETTE COLE,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. David C. Keesler, 

Magistrate Judge. (3:13-cv-00057-DCK)

Submitted: September 15, 2014 Decided: September 24, 2014

Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lynnette Cole, Appellant Pro Se. Margaret Mary Manos, 

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG GOVERNMENT CENTER, Charlotte, North 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Lynnette Cole appeals the magistrate judge’s order 

granting the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment on her 

failure to accommodate claim under the Americans with 

Disabilities Act. On appeal, she contends that the magistrate 

judge erred in granting summary judgment to the Defendant based 

on the evidence. We affirm.

We review the grant of summary judgment de novo, 

applying the same legal standards as the magistrate judge and 

viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the 

nonmoving party. Martin v. Lloyd, 700 F.3d 132, 135 (4th Cir. 

2012). A court must enter summary judgment “against a party who 

fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of 

an element essential to that party’s case, and on which that 

party will bear the burden of proof at trial.” Celotex Corp. v. 

Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986).

“Where the record taken as a whole could not lead a 

rational trier of fact to find for the non-moving party, there 

is no genuine issue for trial.” Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. 

Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986) (citation and 

internal quotation marks omitted). “The nonmoving party cannot 

create a genuine issue of material fact through mere speculation 

or the building of one inference upon another,” Othentec Ltd. v. 

Phelan, 526 F.3d 135, 140 (4th Cir. 2008) (citation and internal 
3

quotation omitted), and she cannot defeat summary judgment with 

merely a scintilla of evidence, Am. Arms Int’l v. Herbert, 563 

F.3d 78, 82 (4th Cir. 2009). Rather, she must produce evidence 

“upon which a jury could properly proceed to find a verdict for 

the party producing it, upon whom the onus of proof is imposed.” 

Othentec Ltd., 526 F.3d at 140 (citations and internal quotation

marks omitted).

We have reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs, 

and we conclude that the magistrate judge did not err in 

granting summary judgment to the Defendant. 

Accordingly, we affirm the magistrate judge’s order.

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
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7319 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7319

 To amend the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 2016 to provide 
   flexibility with respect to the leaseback of certain Federal real 
                   property, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 17, 2018

  Mr. Barletta (for himself and Mr. Denham) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and 
                             Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 2016 to provide 
   flexibility with respect to the leaseback of certain Federal real 
                   property, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. LEASEBACK RESTRICTION.

    Section 12(b)(4) of the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 
2016 (40 U.S.C. 1303 note; Public Law 114-287) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``for a period of greater than 3 years'' 
        before the period at the end;
            (2) by striking ``None of the'' and inserting the 
        following:
                    ``(A) In general.--None of the''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(B) Requirements.--A leaseback under this 
                paragraph--
                            ``(i) shall expire on or before the last 
                        day of the 3-year period beginning on the date 
                        of the sale of the respective property;
                            ``(ii) may not contain any options to 
                        extend or renew the leaseback;
                            ``(iii) may only be entered into once for 
                        purposes of temporarily housing the Federal 
                        agency in the property at the time of the sale; 
                        and
                            ``(iv) shall only be for the purpose of 
                        facilitating the sale of the respective 
                        property.''.
                                 <all>
```
## NUMBER 13

- 12

- 00 621

- CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ ROSALVA RICO AS NEXT FRIEND OF J. E. SALINAS RICO AND A. C. SALINAS , A ppellant ,

v.

OSCAR SALINAS D/BA DEL INN SUITES AND FIRST NATIONAL BANK , A ppellees

.

____________________________________________________________

On a ppeal from the 389th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.

________________________________________________ ____________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Perkes Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Rosalva Rico as n ext f riend of J.E. Salinas Rico and A.C. Salinas
, appealed a judgment entered by the 389th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas. On

October 18, 2012, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the notice of appeal failed2

to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5(e) (3) and 25.1(d)(2)

. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P . 9.5(e) (3) and 25.1(d)(2) . The Clerk directed appellant to file an amended notice
of appeal with the district clerk's office within 30 days from the date of that notice. On
February 7, 2013, the Clerk notified appellant that the defect s had not been corrected and
warned appellant that the a ppeal would be dismissed if the defect s w ere not cured within
ten days. Appellant has not responded to the notices from the Clerk or corrected the

defects.
An appellate court may dismiss a civil appeal for want of prosecution or failure to
comply with a n otice from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified

time. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b),(c). The Court, having considered the d ocuments on
file, and appellant’ s failure to correct the defect, is of the opinion that the appeal shoul d be

dismissed. See id. 37.3, 42.3(b),(c). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR

WANT OF PROSECUTION and failure to comply with a notice from the Court. See id.

PER CURIAM

D elivered and filed the 7th day of March
, 20 13

.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 12, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 62630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25464]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (Including the 
States of Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee, and 
Wisconsin)

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be 
conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, 
ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal 
Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, November 16, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Smiley at 1-888-912-1227 or 414-
231-2360.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that a meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held 
Tuesday, November 16, 2010, at 1 p.m. Central Time via telephone 
conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit 
written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, 
notification of intent to participate must be made with Ellen Smiley. 
For more information please contact Ms. Smiley at 1-888-912-1227 or 
414-231-2360, or write TAP Office Stop 1006MIL, 211 West Wisconsin 
Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53203-2221, or post comments to the Web site: 
http://www.improveirs.org.
    The agenda will include various IRS issues.

    Dated: October 4, 2010.
Shawn F. Collins,
Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2010-25464 Filed 10-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
No. 87-1342.

#### Arambulo *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to file transcript of proceeding in the *1040District Court under seal granted. Certiorari denied.
#### STATE ex rel. Johnathan MYERS v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2009-KH-2731.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 14, 2011.

In re Myers, Johnathan; —Plaintiff; Applying for Reconsideration of this court’s action dated November 19, 2010, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 06-4969; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 09-KH-86S.

Reconsideration denied.
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Commercial Mortgage Servicing**D1086-120, 12th Floor550 South Tyron StreetCharlotte, NC 28202 1-800-326-1334 |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

** ****ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE** Reference is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1, 2014, by and among RBS COMMERICAL FUNDING INC., as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as General Master Servicer, CWCAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC, as General Special Servicer, NCB, FSB, as NCB Master Servicer, NCB, FSB, as Co-op Special Servicer, TRIMONT REAL ESTATE ADVISORS, INC., as Trust Advisor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, as Tax Administrator and as Custodian, and WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2014-C21 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement. Pursuant to Section 11.12 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that: 1. A review of the activities of the General Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and 2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 4th day of March 2016.  /s/ Daniel BoberDaniel BoberExecutive Vice PresidentWells Fargo Bank  

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A |  (logo) Together we’ll go far |
|-----------------------|------------------------------------------|
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7113 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7113

  To amend title 18, United States Code, to clarify the definition of 
               crime of violence, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 2, 2018

  Mrs. Roby introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 18, United States Code, to clarify the definition of 
               crime of violence, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Combat Violent Crime Act of 2018''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE DEFINITION OF CRIME OF VIOLENCE.

    Section 924(c)(3)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
     (a) by striking ``by its nature, involves'' and inserting ``, 
based on the facts underlying the offense, involved''; and
    (b) by striking ``may be used'' and inserting ``may have been 
used''.

SEC. 3. APPLICATION.

    (a) In General.--The amendments made by this Act shall apply to any 
offense committed on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Rule of Construction.--The amendments made by this Act shall 
not be construed to create any right to challenge a sentence imposed 
before the date of the enactment of this Act under section 924 of title 
18, United States Code.
                                 <all>
```
#### Jamall ARMSTEAD v. Burl CAIN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 2010-KP-1033.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 29, 2010.

In re Armstead, Jamall; —Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 03-2592; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 10-KH-148.

Denied.