alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) Studies","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"hQY8UmcwVd\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/analog-field-testing\/neemo\/nasa-extreme-environment-mission-operations-neemo-studies\/\">NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) Studies<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/analog-field-testing\/neemo\/nasa-extreme-environment-mission-operations-neemo-studies\/embed\/#?secret=hQY8UmcwVd\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) Studies” — NASA\" data-secret=\"hQY8UmcwVd\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/05\/532156main_neemo-eva-226.jpg?w=226","thumbnail_width":226,"thumbnail_height":170}
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          12,948
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 2,491
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     77,994
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            77,994
<LOANS>                                        185,929
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,948
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 298,290
<DEPOSITS>                                     261,769
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             10,844
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,091
<OTHER-SE>                                      23,586
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 298,290
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  7,661
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                2,159
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   466
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                10,286
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,810
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  99
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            3,909
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      280
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  49
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  6,005
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,934
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,934
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,272
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.62
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.69
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                        61
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    180
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,944
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      405
<RECOVERIES>                                       103
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,922
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,948
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            795


</TABLE>
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D2023

- 010 6

_____________________________
A NTHONY G EORGE B ROWN II
, Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County

. John F. Simon, Jr. , Judge

.

March 6, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
O STERHAUS , C.J., and R OBERTS and M.K. T HOMAS , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Tyler Kemper Payne, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Darcy Townsend, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
#### Silver and Others *v.*The Governor.

In error.

*Wednesday, May*27.

A PERSON being commissioned a justice of the peace, executed a bond with surety to the governor, conditioned for the faithful discharge of his official duties, and for the payment, to the persons entitled, of all moneys that should come into his *16hands by virtue of Ms office, At the time the bond was exethere was no statute in force authorising the execution of such a bond by a justice of the peace. *Held,*that the bond was not warranted by law, and that no suit could be sustained on it.
**IMAGIN
MOLECULAR CORPORATION**
 **(Formerly
Known As)**
 **Cipher
Holding Corporation**
 
 Exhibit
31.2
 CERTIFICATIONS
 
 I, Neil
Sy, the Registrant's Chief Financial Officer, certify that:
 
 1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Imagin Molecular
Corporation;
 
 2. Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;
 
 3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
 
 4. The
Registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: a) designed such
disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating
to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us
by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this
quarterly report is being prepared; b) evaluated the effectiveness of the
Registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days
prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;
 
 5. The
Registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
Registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and b) any fraud, whether
or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the Registrant's internal controls; and
 
 6. The
Registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly
report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in
other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
 
 Date:
August 22, 2005
 
 /s/Neil
Sy
 Chief
Financial Officer, President, Chairman
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ONIX SYSTEMS
INC.'S  REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JULY 4, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000
       
<S>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>           6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                JAN-02-1999
<PERIOD-END>                     JUL-04-1998
<CASH>                                48,496
<SECURITIES>                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                         37,461
<ALLOWANCES>                           1,939
<INVENTORY>                           32,560
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     121,801
<PP&E>                                14,887
<DEPRECIATION>                         6,486
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       186,252
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 30,860
<BONDS>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                                0
<COMMON>                                 156
<OTHER-SE>                           153,556
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         186,252
<SALES>                               75,583
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      75,583
<CGS>                                 43,554
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         43,554
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                       4,565
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         127
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       277
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        9,001
<INCOME-TAX>                           3,581
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    5,420
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                           5,420
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           0.39
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0.39
        

</TABLE>
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports.

Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum

opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain

computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of

Appeals and does not include the filing date. 

1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

2 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,

3 Plaintiff-Appellee,

4 v. NO. 34,608

5 NADIA MONTOYA,

6 Defendant-Appellant.

7 and

8 PORFIRIO MONTOYA a/k/a

9 PORFIRIO J. MONTOYA and 

10 TOSCANA AT CABEZON 

11 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION,

12 INC., 

13 Defendants.

14 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SANDOVAL COUNTY

15 John F. Davis, District Judge

16 Joshua R. Simms, P.C.

17 Joshua R. Simms

18 Albuquerque, NM

19 for Appellant

20 McCarthy & Holthus, LLP

21 Jeannette M. Whittaker
2

1 Andrew Yarrington

2 Albuquerque, NM

3 for Appellee

4 MEMORANDUM OPINION

5 VIGIL, Judge.

6 {1} Summary affirmance was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of

7 proposed summary disposition. No memorandum opposing summary affirmance has

8 been filed and the time for doing so has expired.

9 {2} AFFIRMED.

10 {3} IT IS SO ORDERED.

11 _______________________________

12 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Chief Judge

13 WE CONCUR:

14 ___________________________________

15 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge

16 _________________________________

17 TIMOTHY L. GARCIA, Judge
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2796 Referred in House (RFH)]

  2d Session
                                S. 2796

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 6, 2004

               Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To clarify that service marks, collective marks, and certification 
 marks are entitled to the same protections, rights, and privileges of 
                              trademarks.

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

SECTION 1. PROTECTIONS, RIGHTS, AND PRIVILEGES OF SERVICE MARKS, 
              COLLECTIVE MARKS, AND CERTIFICATION MARKS.

    The Act entitled ``An Act to provide for the registration and 
protection of trade-marks used in commerce, to carry out the provisions 
of certain international conventions, and for other purposes'', 
approved July 5, 1946 (commonly referred to as the Trademark Act of 
1946) is amended--
            (1) in section 3 (15 U.S.C. 1053) in the first sentence, by 
        striking ``protection'' and inserting ``protections, rights, 
        and privileges''; and
            (2) in section 4 (15 U.S.C. 1054) in the first sentence, by 
        striking ``protection'' and inserting ``protections, rights, 
        and privileges''.

            Passed the Senate October 6, 2004.

            Attest:

                                             EMILY J. REYNOLDS,

                                                             Secretary.
```
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Sonja Caldwell","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/sonja-m-caldwellnasa-gov\/","title":"Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator (PTD)","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"vTYiqLPT62\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/pathfinder-technology-demonstrator-ptd\/\">Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator (PTD)<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/pathfinder-technology-demonstrator-ptd\/embed\/#?secret=vTYiqLPT62\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator (PTD)” — NASA\" data-secret=\"vTYiqLPT62\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/09\/ptd-4-lisa-t-zero-g.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
576 A.2d 282

#### IN THE MATTER OF HARRY DREIER, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW.

July 18, 1990.

ORDER

This matter having been submitted to the Court on the report of the Disciplinary Review Board recommending that HARRY DREIER of PLAINFIELD, who was admitted to the Bar of this State in 1976, be publicly reprimanded,

And it appearing from the Disciplinary Review Board’s report that HARRY DREIER failed to act with reasonable diligence in his capacity as a trustee and failed to communicate with the beneficiary of the trust, in violation of *RPC*1.3,

And it further appearing that the foregoing misconduct and respondent’s prior public reprimand require the imposition of a public reprimand; and good cause appearing;

*155It is ORDERED that the report and recommendation of the Disciplinary Review Board are adopted and HARRY DREIER is hereby publicly reprimanded; and it is further

ORDERED that the Decision and Recommendation of the Disciplinary Review Board, together with this order and the full record of the matter, be added as a permanent part of the file of said HARRY DREIER as an attorney at law of the State of New Jersey; and it is further

ORDERED that HARRY DREIER reimburse the Ethics Financial Committee for appropriate administrative costs.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6679

STEVEN E. TARPLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ROBERT J. KUPEC; ROBERT D. RITCHEY; MS. PULLER; BRUCE BOZMAN; T. MILLINER, Captain; G. BARNES; DR. REEVES; A. TULL, Lieutenant; LIEUTENANT HOLLAND; T. J. LEWIS, Officer; GEORGE KALOROUMAKIS; MR. NASTRI; JOHN DOE, Hearing Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-3461-WMN) Submitted: August 28, 2003 Decided: September 4, 2003 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Steven E. Tarpley, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane Weber, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Steven E. Tarpley seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to recuse the district court judge from hearing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Tarpley seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Anthony Fontana, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

United of Omaha Life Insurance Company, 

Defendant. 

No. CV-15-02151-PHX-ROS

ORDER 

Pursuant to the Parties’ Stipulation of Dismissal and good cause appearing, 

IT IS ORDERED the stipulation (Doc. 56) is GRANTED. The plaintiff’s claims 

are dismissed against defendant United of Omaha Life Insurance Company with 

prejudice, each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. 

Dated this 3rd day of January, 2017. 

Honorable Roslyn O. Silver

Senior United States District Judge

 

Case 2:15-cv-02151-ROS Document 57 Filed 01/03/17 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         8,487,946
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                           0
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                               8,487,946
<CASH>                                         759,749
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         393,447
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,258,821
<POLICY-LOSSES>                              1,153,270
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            954,101
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,529
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,258,821
<PREMIUMS>                                   7,829,171
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            421,810
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                   0
<OTHER-INCOME>                                       0
<BENEFITS>                                     519,708
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                  (122,760)
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                         4,504,826
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,729,201
<INCOME-TAX>                                   593,831
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,135,370
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,135,370
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.42
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 602,265
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            712,790
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                               55,056
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               216,841
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                              1,153,270
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>