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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN SUCH REPORT.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                             827
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,217
<ALLOWANCES>                                       388
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,656
<PP&E>                                       1,313,745
<DEPRECIATION>                                  34,512
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,297,580
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           29,966
<BONDS>                                        363,103
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           406
<OTHER-SE>                                     762,931
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,297,580
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                71,320
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,399
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                18,484
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,492
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,137
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 22,852
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             22,852
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    22,852
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.68
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.68


</TABLE>
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 7424** 

DEVAUGHN JHERELLE HALL , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. DIRECTOR, VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States Distr ict Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond
. M. Hannah Lauck , Magistrate Judge. ( 3:09

- cv - 00647

- MHL )

Submitted : May 13, 2011 Decided: May 20, 2011

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per cur iam opinion
. Howard Highland, WASHINGTON & LEE IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP PROGRAM, Lexington, Virginia, for Appellant. Eugene Paul Murphy, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not bindi ng precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Devaughn Jherelle Hall seeks to appeal the magistrate judge ’ s *

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hall has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We order denying relief on h is 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (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) (2006)
. 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 claims 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 petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional rig ht. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85.

* The parties consented to the exercise of the district court’s jurisdiction by a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006).3 dispense with oral argument because the fa cts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSE D
---

Exhibit 99.9

Consent of Independent Registered Chartered Accountants

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration
Statement No. 333-184496 on Form F-10 and Registration Statement No. 333-171775
on Form S-8 and to the use of our reports dated March 25, 2013 relating to the
consolidated financial statements of Veris Gold Corp. and subsidiaries ("Veris")
(which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an emphasis of
matter paragraph referring to the existence of conditions that may cast
substantial doubt about Veris ability to continue as a going concern) and the
effectiveness of Veris' internal control over financial reporting appearing in
this Annual Report on Form 40-F of Veris for the year ended December 31,
2012.

/s/ Deloitte LLP

Independent Registered Chartered Accountants Vancouver,
Canada March 28, 2013

---
Case 2:15-cr-01557-DLR Document 4 Filed 10/20/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-cr-01557-DLR Document 4 Filed 10/20/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-cr-01557-DLR Document 4 Filed 10/20/15 Page 3 of 3
----

----

| 1.   | the      annual report on Form 20-F of the Company for the year ended April 30,      2009 (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. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                |   |                         |
|-------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------|
| Date:  June      25, 2009 |   |                         |
|                                |   | /s/ Joseph Miller            |
|                                |   | Joseph      Miller           |
|                                |   | Chief      Financial Officer |

----

----
EXHIBIT 32





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 Annual Report of Ambient Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (the "Report") filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, John J. Joyce, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal  Executive Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) 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 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, as amended; and,



2.

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.



Date: August 14, 2008



| |     |                                                                                                     
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                     
| | By: | /s/ JOHN J. JOYCE                                                                                   
| |     | John J. Joyce                                                                                       
| |     | Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)



A certification furnished pursuant to this Item will not be deemed filed for purposes of section 18 of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78r), or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the small business issuer specifically incorporates it by reference.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice of Members for the FY 15 Performance Review Board.

# SUMMARY:

Section 4314(c)(4) of Title 5, U.S.C.; requires each agency to publish notification of the appointment of individuals who may serve as members of that Agency's Performance Review Board (PRB). The following individuals have been designated to serve on the FY 15 Performance Review Board for the U.S. Small Business Administration:

1. Robert Hill (Chair), Associate Administrator, Field Operations

2. Nicholas Coutsos, Associate Administrator, Congressional and Legislative Affairs

3. Isabella Guzman, Senior Advisor to the Administrator

4. James Rivera, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance

5. John Klein, Assistant General Counsel for Procurement

6. Renee Macklin, Chief Information Officer

7. Francisco Marrero, District Director, South Florida

Maria Contreras-Sweet,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 2014-26039 Filed 10-31-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
#### J. F. Stephenson *v.*J. A. Lishy *& Co.*

Attachment — Removal from State.

Acts in selling property, household goods, sufficient to authorize attachment. Exemptions not allowed.

APPEAL PROM CLINTON CIRCUIT COURT.

September 26, 1871.

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Lindsay:

The preponderance of the evidence in this case is clearly in favor of the proposition that the appellee, J. F. Stephenson, had before the institution of this suit ceased to be a resident housekeeper of this State. It may be possible that he intended to *539return from Missouri to Clinton county after making a crop in that State, and that'lie contemplated the possibility-of returning to Kentucky to live in case bis wife was not pleased with, or failed to enjoy £ood bealtb, in tbe west, but bis actions before leaving Kentucky in selling off bis household property, and conveying bis bouse and lot to bis brother tend to show tbat bis principal object in leaving was to acquire a new home. Tbe court therefore did not err in disallowing his claim to the exemption of the house and lot as a homestead. It is a matter of no consequence whether the levy of appellees’ execution created a lien or not. The deed from J. E. to T. V. Stephenson, which was absolute upon its face, though in point of fact a mortgage, obstructed the appellee in the enforcement of his legal remedies, and he, therefore, had the right to go to equity to be relieved against said deed. Although this proceeding is not literally to enforce a lien created by tbe levy of an order of attachment, still we are of opinion tbat tbe judgment of tbe court should have fixed tbe place for tbe sale of tbe real estate, and at least required tbe commissioner to make the same on the first day of some county or circuit court. Eor this error the judgment is reversed. The cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

*Butler &*Brent, *for appellant.*

Winfrey, *for appellee.*
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 804

AN ACT

To amend part Q of title I of the Omnibus Crime

administrative public safety services.law enforcement officers who perform nonner that produces a net gain of the number ofhire law enforcement officers are used in a manthat Federal funds made available to hire or reControl and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to ensure
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 804

AN ACT

To amend part Q of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control

and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to ensure that Federal

funds made available to hire or rehire law enforcement

officers are used in a manner that produces a net gain

of the number of law enforcement officers who perform

nonadministrative public safety services.
2

•HR 804 EH

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. NET GAIN OF OFFICERS.

4 Section 1704 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control

5 and Safe Streets Act of 1968 is amended by adding at

6 the end the following:

7 ‘‘(d) NET GAIN OF OFFICERS.—Notwithstanding any

8 other provision under this part, funding provided under

9 this part for hiring or rehiring a career law enforcement

10 officer shall be used by an entity described in section

11 1701(a) to ensure that such entity achieves a net gain in

12 the number of law enforcement officers who perform non13 administrative public safety service.’’.

14 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

15 The amendment made by section 1 shall apply to all

16 applications and grant renewal requests made on or after

17 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Passed the House of Representatives October 7,

1998.

Attest:

Clerk.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 631 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 631

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to place the burden on the 
  Secretary of the Treasury of proving the accuracy of determinations 
           forming a basis for certain notices of deficiency.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 6, 1997

Mr. Canady of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to place the burden on the 
  Secretary of the Treasury of proving the accuracy of determinations 
           forming a basis for certain notices of deficiency.

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

SECTION 1. BURDEN OF PROVING ACCURACY OF DETERMINATIONS WITHIN A NOTICE 
              OF DEFICIENCY.

    (a) In General.--Section 6212 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(e) Burden of Proving Accuracy of Certain Determinations.--
            ``(1) In general.--In the case of a deficiency to which 
        this subsection applies, if the taxpayer--
                    ``(A) petitions the Tax Court for a redetermination 
                of such deficiency, and
                    ``(B) has fully cooperated with the Secretary 
                (including providing, within a reasonable period, 
                access to and inspection of all witnesses, information, 
                and documents within the control of the taxpayer as 
                reasonably requested by the Secretary) with respect to 
                such deficiency,
        then the Secretary shall have the burden of proving the 
        accuracy of each determination forming a basis for such 
        deficiency.
            ``(2) Deficiencies to which subsection applies.--This 
        subsection applies to any deficiency of tax imposed by subtitle 
        A on an individual if the notice of such deficiency was 
        mailed--
                    ``(A) during any extension under section 6501(c)(4) 
                of the period of limitation under section 6501, or
                    ``(B) at any other time during such period if the 
                Tax Court determines that such notice is not supported 
                by reasonable and probative information concerning such 
                deficiency.''
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Tisloe *v.*Graeter.

Assumpsit on the following instrument of writing: “Reed. *Vincennes,*Sep. 14th, 1822, of *P. Tisloe,*200 dollars for safe-keeping.” *Held,*that the defendant could not introduce parol testimony to prove, that the money was not deposited for safe-keeping, but was paid in discharge of a debt.

ERROR to the *Knox*Circuit Court. — Assumpsit by *Tisloe*against *Graeter*for money deposited for safe-keeping, and for money had and received. Pleas, non-assumpsit and payment. Verdict and judgment for the defendant.

*Judah,*for the plaintiff

*Nelson,*for the defendant.

Blackford, J.

It is shown by a bill of exceptions, that upon the trial of this cause, the plaintiff gave in evidence the following receipt: “Reed. *Vincennes,*Sep. 14th, 1822, of *P.*Tisloe, 200 dollars for *safe-keeping.*— Ch. Graeter.” The defendant offered parol testimony to prove, “that the money in the receipt mentioned was not deposited for safe-keeping as therein stated, but was paid to the defendant in payment of a certain debt;* which evidence was objected to, but admitted by the Court. This, parol evidence should have been rejected. It goes to contradict, in the most express and direct terms, the written contract of the parties. W ritten testimony may be explained, but not directly contradicted, by parol evidence (1).

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed, and the verdict set aside, with costs. Cause remanded, *Sic.*

(1)

 Vide Chitt. on Cont. 22 — 28. *Odam*v. *Beard,*ante, p. 191, and note.
ORIGINAL 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

DA 23-0330 

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

CHRISTOPHER JAMES IRVINE, 

Defendant and Appellant. 

JUN 2 0 2023 

Bowen ,.nwooa 

Clerk of St.!_ , ,arne Court 

State of Montana 

ORDER 

Chad Wright, Appellate Defender, petitions for an out-of-time appeal for 

Christopher James Irvine from the order entered on March 24, 2023, by the Twentieth 

Judicial District Court, Lake County, in Cause No. DC-19-99. The Attorney General's 

Office does not object to this motion. 

Wright asserts that Irvine's trial attorney left employment at the Office of Public 

Defender (OPD) immediately after the judgment was issued in this case. Irvine contacted 

OPD on multiple occasions and indicated his desire to appeal the case, but OPD did not 

timely refer the matter to the Appellate Defender Division (ADD) and thus a Notice of 

Appeal was not timely filed. 

Wright asserts that it would be unjust to deny Irvine the right to appeal when the 

untimeliness of the Notice of Appeal was caused by an error or oversight out of Irvine's 

control. 

We grant out-of-time appeals under M. R. App. P. 4(6) when an appellant 

establishes the existence of "extraordinary circumstances amounting to a gross miscarriage 

of justice," which would exist if we were to deny the petition here. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the petition for an out-of-time appeal is 

GRANTED. 

06/20/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0330
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Office of Appellate Defender shall have 30 

days from the date of this Order within which to prepare, file, and serve a Notice of Appeal 

and a Request for Transcripts, if necessary, in compliance with the Montana Rules of 

Appellate Procedure. 

The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this Order to all counsel of record. 

DATED this t.6 day of June, 2023. 

Chief Justice 

" "-,r,.....r 

/PI e 

e94, 

2
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-14-00622-CV

Marisela G. SALAS, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Martin Suarez and as 

Next Friend of Keyla Marizel Salas Suarez, Minor,

Appellant

v.

ALLEN KELLER CO. I, L.L.C. d/b/a Allen Keller Co.,

Appellee

From the 216th Judicial District Court, Gillespie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 13410

Honorable N. Keith Williams, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI, JUSTICE BARNARD, AND JUSTICE MARTINEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED. Costs of appeal are taxed against Appellant Marisela G. Salas, Individually and as 

Representative of the Estate of Martin Suarez and as Next Friend of Keyla Marizel Salas Suarez, 

Minor.

SIGNED August 19, 2015.

_____________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice
I

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 618

To prohibit the Secretary of Agriculture from using information from the

National Cheese Exchange to fix minimum milk prices under Federal

milk marketing orders.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 5, 1997

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on Agriculture

A BILL

To prohibit the Secretary of Agriculture from using information from the National Cheese Exchange to fix minimum

milk prices under Federal milk marketing orders.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. USE OF NATIONAL CHEESE EXCHANGE INFOR4 MATION TO FIX MILK PRICES FOR MILK HAN5 DLERS.

6 Section 8(5)(A) of the Agricultural Adjustment Act

7 (7 U.S.C. 608c(5)(A)), reenacted with amendments by the
2

•HR 618 IH

1 Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, is amend2 ed by adding at the end the following new sentence: ‘‘In3 formation from the National Cheese Exchange may not

4 be used to fix minimum prices for milk of any use classi5 fication.’’.

Æ