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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999             APR-02-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999             APR-02-2000
<CASH>                                           8,616                  60,193
<SECURITIES>                                         0                  18,006
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,009                   7,819
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,742)                   (295)
<INVENTORY>                                        264                     409
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,380                  89,027
<PP&E>                                           6,571                   8,847
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,092)                 (5,625)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  19,187                 181,362
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,338                  18,396
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                        801                       0
<COMMON>                                             4                      47
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,719                 161,788
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    19,187                 181,362
<SALES>                                          9,256                  21,777
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,256                  21,777
<CGS>                                            3,997                  11,239
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,010                  38,856
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,749)                 (2,410)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 155                     200
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (17,157)                (26,108)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (17,157)                (26,108)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (17,157)                (26,108)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (4.46)                  (1.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (4.46)                  (1.40)


</TABLE>
#### Muir *v.*Clark.—In error.

*Saturday, June*21.

A BILL in chancery for relief against a usurious contract, must show that the principal and lawful interest have been paid or tendered; and in the case of a tender, the money must be brought into Court. *Crawford et al.*v. *Harvey,*1 Blackf. 382.

The 33d section of the R. S. 1843, p. 582, respecting “ the interest of money,” applies only to bills of discovery.

A bill in chancery showing that the complainant has no equity, may be objected to at any stage of the proceedings. *Cummins*v. *White et al.*4 Blackf. 356.
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In connection with the Annual Report of UNR Holdings, Inc., a Colorado corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Iuriy Vladimirovich Shevchenko, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to his knowledge:





(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





/s/ Iuriy Vladimirovich ShevchenkoIuriy Vladimirivich Shevchenko

Chief Financial Officer

May 4, 2011








[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to UNR Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by UNR Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
#### The State *v.*Montgomery and Others.

*Thursday, July*18.

A probate judge could not, in 1842, take a recognizance returnable to a Court out of his county.

ERROR to the *Montgomery*Circuit Court.

Dewey, J.

— The state sued out a *scire facias*against the defendants in error on a recognizance acknowledged by them before the probate judge of *Shelby*county, conditioned for the appearance of one of the recognizors before the Circuit Court of *Montgomery*county, to answer a certain criminal charge preferred against him. The recognizance was returned to the *Montgomery*Circuit Court, and there recorded. The defendants demurred to the *scire*facias, and the Court sustained the demurrer, and discharged the defendants.

We think the decision of the Circuit Court was right. The probate judge had no authority when the recognizance was taken, in 1842, to take a recognizance returnable to a Court out of his county. By a statute of 1841, probate judges were authorized to issue writs of *habeas*corpus, and proceed upon them in the same manner in which the associate judges of the Circuit Courts were empowered to do. Laws of 1841, p. 129. This provision authorized the probate judges to take recognizances in certain cases. But the associate judges could take no recognizances which were not returnable to the Circuit Court in the county where they were taken. R. S. 1838, p. 162. The probate judge of *Shelby*county could not, therefore, take a recognizance, valid as such, which was returnable to the *Montgomery*Circuit Court. There was nothing on which to found the *scire facias*in the present instance.

When a person having committed a crime in one county has fled or removed into another county, he may be arrested in the latter and sent into the former for examination, where he may be discharged, committed, or recognized. R. S. 1838, p. 320. Or, if a person be arrested by the sheriff of any county on a *capias*issuing from any of the Circuit Courts on an indictment, he may recognize before the sheriff to appear at the Circuit Court which issued the process. R. S. 1838, p. 221. And now any officer authorized to take recognizances may *222take them returnable to any Court before which the offender is required to appear. R. S. 1843, p. 990.

*A. A. Hammond*and *S. C.*Willson, for the state.

*R. C.*Gregory, for the defendants.

*Per Curiam.*

— The judgment is affirmed.
<PAGE>   1


                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.4(d)

                                    AMENDMENT
                                       TO
                              EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


              THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the "Amendment") is made
December 16, 1999 by and between Valassis Communications, Inc. (the
"Corporation") and Barry P. Hoffman (the "Executive").

              WHEREAS, the Corporation and the Executive entered into that
certain Employment Agreement effective as of March 18, 1992, as amended on
December 19, 1995, December 12, 1997 and December 9, 1998 (the "Employment
Agreement"); and

              WHEREAS, the Corporation and the Executive desire to amend the
Employment Agreement to extend the term of employment under the Employment
Agreement.

              NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, the parties
hereto agree as set forth below.

              1. The first sentence of Section 3(a) of the Employment Agreement
shall be amended to read as follows:

                    "The Executive's Annual Base Salary ("Annual Base Salary"),
              payable on a biweekly basis, shall be at the annual rate of not
              less than $310,000 effective January 1, 2000."

              2. All other terms of the Employment Agreement shall remain in
full force and effect.

              3. This instrument, together with the Employment Agreement,
contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter
hereof.

              IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Executive and the Corporation have caused
this Agreement to be executed as of the day and year first above written.

                                                   VALASSIS COMMUNICATIONS, INC.


                                                   By:
                                                      --------------------------
                                                   Name:
                                                        ------------------------
                                                   Title:
                                                         -----------------------

                                                   -----------------------------
                                                          Barry P. Hoffman
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 6053** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. WILLIAM ANTHONY ROBERSON , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh
. Louise W. Flanagan , District Judge. ( 5:07

- cr - 00314

- FL

- 1 ; 5:09

- cv - 00104

- FL )

Submitted : July 20, 2012 Decided: July 25, 2012

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. William Anthony Roberson , Appellant Pro Se. Edward D. Gray , Ethan A. Ontjes , Stephen Aubrey West , Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appel lee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: William Anthony Roberson seeks to appeal the district court’s order a dopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of a ppealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claim s is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Roberson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                            5395
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             100
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                  3000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      14244
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           32851
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             32233
<LOANS>                                         154910
<ALLOWANCE>                                        515
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  217627
<DEPOSITS>                                      169221
<SHORT-TERM>                                      8831
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                               2935
<LONG-TERM>                                      11473
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            14
<OTHER-SE>                                       25153
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  217627
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                   3263
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  799
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    47
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                  4109
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                2097
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                2407
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                             1702
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      (2)
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                   2105
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (304)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       (304)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (202)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.16)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.22
<LOANS-NON>                                         30
<LOANS-PAST>                                       447
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   518
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         3
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  515
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               335
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            180
        

</TABLE>
BF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0143

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

BENJAMIN EUGENE COLE JR.,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration Appellee’s motion for a 30-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time 

to and including September 2, 2024, within which to prepare, file, and serve its 

response brief.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 26 2024

07/26/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0143
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

In re:

MICHAEL E.D. GILYARD,

Movant.

No. 14-6240

(D.C. No. 5:14-CV-01110-R)

(W.D. Okla.)

ORDER

Before KELLY, TYMKOVICH, and BACHARACH, Circuit Judges.

Michael E.D. Gilyard, pro se, seeks a writ of mandamus ordering the district 

court to rule on his pending 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas application, order service of 

process on respondent, and for “an order . . . immedi[a]tely releasing [him] from 

custody.” Pet. at 2. The district court’s docket sheet shows the application was 

originally filed in the Eastern District of Oklahoma on September 23, 2014, and 

transferred to the Western District of Oklahoma on October 10. On December 8, 

Mr. Gilyard filed a motion to amend his application. The court granted the motion 

to amend on January 9, 2015, and Mr. Gilyard filed his amended application on 

January 21. 

“[A] writ of mandamus is a drastic remedy, and is to be invoked only in 

extraordinary circumstances.” In re Cooper Tire & Rubber Co., 568 F.3d 1180, 1186 

(10th Cir. 2009) (internal quotation marks omitted). “For mandamus to issue, there 

must be a clear right to the relief sought, a plainly defined and peremptory duty on 

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

February 2, 2015

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 14-6240 Document: 01019379230 Date Filed: 02/02/2015 Page: 1 
- 2 -

the part of respondent to do the action in question, and no other adequate remedy 

available.” Johnson v. Rogers, 917 F.2d 1283, 1285 (10th Cir. 1990). 

This court has held that an inordinate delay in deciding a habeas case may 

warrant mandamus relief. See id. However, there has been no such delay in this 

case. Also, there is nothing to suggest that Mr. Gilyard should be released from 

custody. The mandamus petition is denied. We grant Mr. Gilyard’s motion to 

proceed in forma pauperis. 

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 14-6240 Document: 01019379230 Date Filed: 02/02/2015 Page: 2
Exhibit 32.2

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

of Chief Financial Officer

In connection with the Annual Report of eDiets.com, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert T. Hamilton, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

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

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and result of operations of the Company.

Date: March 29, 2007



By:

/s/ Robert T. HamiltonName:

Robert T. HamiltonTitle:

Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
has been provided to eDiets.com, Inc. and will be retained by eDiets.com, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1





    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 Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc.
(the "Issuer") on Form 10-Q for the period ending July 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Curtis J. Clawson, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
of the Issuer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:

     1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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




     /s/ Curtis J. Clawson
     ---------------------------------------
     Curtis J. Clawson
     Chairman of the Board,
     President and Chief Executive Officer
     September 16, 2002
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                          OF CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER

            PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The  undersigned,  Robert A. Bourne,  the  President and Treasurer of CNL Realty
Corporation,  the  corporate  general  partner of CNL Income Fund XIV, Ltd. (the
"Partnership"),  has executed this  certification  in connection with the filing
with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  of the  Partnership's  Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  March 31, 2003 (the  "Report").  The
undersigned hereby certifies that:

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

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




Date:   May 6, 2003                      /s/ Robert A. Bourne
                                         ------------------------------------
                                         Name:  Robert A. Bourne
                                         Title: President and Treasurer

                                         A signed original
                                         of this written
                                         statement required
                                         by Section 906 has
                                         been provided to
                                         CNL Income Fund
                                         XIV, Ltd. and will
                                         be retained by CNL
                                         Income Fund XIV,
                                         Ltd. and furnished
                                         to the Securities
                                         and Exchange
                                         Commission or its
                                         staff upon
                                         request.