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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       3,658,884
<SECURITIES>                                   552,863
<RECEIVABLES>                               68,558,302
<ALLOWANCES>                                 8,618,021
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            64,152,028
<PP&E>                                       7,427,619<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              71,579,647
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       48,355,892
<BONDS>                                     17,631,728
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        41,891
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,550,136
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                71,579,647
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,160,207
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,700,658
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             4,064,341
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,110,920
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,715,712)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,715,712)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.13)
<FN>
<F1>PP&E DOES NOT APPLY - FIGURE REPRESENTS OTHER ASSETS.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
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  The undersigned officer of Lockbox Link, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 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/Iryna Clark Iryna Clark Chief Executive Officer Chief Financial Officer    April 17, 2017
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FARON E. LOVELACE,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v. ROBIN SANDY; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 17

- 35499

D.C. No. 1:14

- cv
- 00430

- BLW

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Idaho Chief Judge B. Lynn Winmill , Presiding

Submitted May 15 , 2018 **

Before: SILVERMAN , BEA, and WATFORD , Circuit Judges.
Idaho state prisoner Faron E. Lovelace appe als pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional

and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de

novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A

. Hamilton v. Brown , 630 F.3d 889, 892

* Thi s disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAY 23 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 35499

(9th Cir. 2011)

. We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Lovelace’s action because Lovelace
failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief

. See Hebbe v.

Pliler , 627 F.3d 338, 341

- 42 (9th Cir. 2010) (althou gh pro se pleadings are to be
liberally construed, a plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a
plausible claim for relief); see also Sandin v. Conner , 515 U.S. 472, 483

- 8 4 (1995)
( states may create liberty interests protected by due process, but such interests are
limited to “freedom from restraint” which “imposes atypical and significant
hardship on the inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life”) ; Lightner v. Hardison , 239 P.3d 817, 823

- 24 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010) (ana lyzing
Idaho Department of Correction visiting policy and concluding that termination of
visiting privileges do es not impose an atypical and significant hardship )

. The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying appointment of
counsel because Lovelace failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances. See

Palmer v. Valdez , 560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2009) (setting forth standard of
review and requirements for appointment of counsel).
We reject as meritless Lovelace’s contention that the district court failed to
liberally construe the amended complaint.3 17

- 35499

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. STEVEN R. WALKER.

October 20, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1997
<CASH>                                             782
<SECURITIES>                                     5,160
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,361
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (358)
<INVENTORY>                                      4,023
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                19,642
<PP&E>                                          22,435
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (10,574)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  33,236
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,830
<BONDS>                                          2,512
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        24,991
<OTHER-SE>                                         (97)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    33,236
<SALES>                                         20,772
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,772
<CGS>                                           12,512
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,512
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    75
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 178
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,071
<INCOME-TAX>                                       787
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,284
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,284
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .23
        

</TABLE>
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JAMES ELLIS, JR.

October 20, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           2,292
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,868
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         476,617
<DEPRECIATION>                                (37,683)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 529,520
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        297,923
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     24,123
<COMMON>                                            91
<OTHER-SE>                                     114,832
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   529,520
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,781
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,285
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,777
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       813
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, January 28, 2021.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, January 28, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A21D0172. VALERIE PORTER v. SHAILESH MANJUNATH.

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

2018CV303190
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. MAXWELL MELVINS.

December 8, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
585 A.2d 345

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. NELSON BRADLEY.

July 10, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 197 (Wednesday, October 13, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 62690]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25751]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 10-1805; MB Docket No. 10-117; RM-11601]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Grants Pass, Oregon

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Audio Division, at the request of Three Rivers 
Broadcasting LLC, allots FM Channel 257A at Grants Pass, Oregon, as the 
community's second commercial FM transmission service. Channel 257A can 
be allotted at Grants Pass, consistent with the minimum distance 
separation requirements of the Commission's rules, at coordinates 42-
25-25 NL and 123-26-25 WL, with a site restriction of 8.7 km (5.4 
miles) west of the community. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION infra.

DATES: Effective November 12, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Dupont, Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MB Docket No. 10-117, adopted September 24, 2010, and 
released September 27, 2010. The full text of this Commission decision 
is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., 
Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision 
also may be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, 
Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, 
Washington, DC 20554, (800) 378-3160, or via the company's Web site, 
http://www.bcpiweb.com. This document does not contain proposed 
information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not 
contain any proposed information collection burden ``for small business 
concerns with fewer than 25 employees,'' pursuant to the Small Business 
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506 
(c)(4). The Commission will send a copy of this Report and Order in a 
report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office 
pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio, Radio broadcasting.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications 
Commission amends 47 CFR Part 73 as follows:

PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

0
1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.

Sec.  73.202  [Amended]

0
2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Oregon, is 
amended by adding Grants Pass, Channel 257A.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,
Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2010-25751 Filed 10-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-13-00263-CR

Isayah Alkenyon Griffin, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 426TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 258,681, HONORABLE FANCY H. JEZEK, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Isayah Alkenyon Griffin seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

relief on a writ of habeas corpus entered on August 23, 2012. See Tex. Const. art. V, § 8; Tex. Code

Crim. Proc. art. 11.05. The deadline for perfecting the appeal was September 24, 2012. See Tex.

R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1) (providing that notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after day trial

court enters appealable order). Griffin’s notice of appeal was filed on April 15, 2013. 1

On April 19, 2013, Griffin filed a motion requesting an extension of time for filing

notice of appeal in this Court. The rules of appellate procedure allow an appellate court to extend

Where a timely motion for new trial has been filed, a defendant’s notice of appeal must be 1

filed within ninety days after the sentence is imposed or suspended in open court. See Tex. R. App.

P. 26.2(a)(2). According to Griffin, he filed a motion for rehearing on November 14, 2012. However,

because Griffin is appealing an order denying relief on a writ of habeas corpus, not a judgment of

conviction, the motion is ineffective for purposes of extending appellate deadlines under rule 26.2.

Furthermore, even if the motion were effective to extend Griffin’s appellate deadlines, his deadline

to file his notice of appeal would have been November 21, 2012.
the time to file the notice of appeal if, within fifteen days after the deadline for filing the notice of

appeal, the appellant (1) files the notice of appeal in the trial court and (2) files a motion for

extension of time in the appellate court. Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. Here, both the notice of appeal and

the motion for extension of time were filed more than fifteen days after the deadline for filing the

notice of appeal and therefore were untimely. Consequently, we are without authority to extend the

time to file the notice of appeal. The motion for extension of time is denied.

Griffin failed to timely file a notice of appeal in compliance with rule 26 of the

Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Under these circumstances, we lack jurisdiction to dispose of

this appeal in any manner other than by dismissing it for want of jurisdiction. See Castillo v. State,

369 S.W.3d 196, 198 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012).

__________________________________________

Scott K. Field, Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Goodwin and Field

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: June 6, 2013

Do Not Publish

2
585 A.2d 369

#### LOUIS FUSCO v. THOMAS TUCKER.

September 4, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
585 A.2d 381

#### DENNIS E. WHITNEY v. JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY.

September 18, 1990.

Petition for certification denied. (See 240 *N.J.Super.*420, 573 A.2d 509.)