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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM NB CAPITAL
CORPORATION'S UNAUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND UNAUDITED
STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 INCLUDED IN NB
CAPITAL CORPORATION'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001049551
<NAME>                        NB Capital Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                US Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      25,441,394
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                              464,984,510
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           490,425,904
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             490,425,904
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          444,975
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,001
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                 489,977,927
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               490,425,904
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,256,207
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               428,851
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              8,827,356
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          8,827,356
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 8,827,356
<EPS-BASIC>                                     25,577
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   25,577



</TABLE>
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3867

To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to designate Haiti under 

section 244(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act so that nationals 

of Haiti present in the United States may be granted temporary protected status. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 1, 2004

Mr. DEUTSCH (for himself, Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida, Mr. WEXLER, 

and Mr. HASTINGS of Florida) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to designate 

Haiti under section 244(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act so that nationals of Haiti present in the 

United States may be granted temporary protected status.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Haitian Refugee Pro5 tection Act’’. 
2

•HR 3867 IH 

1 SEC. 2. DEADLINE FOR DESIGNATION OF HAITI. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—Not later than March 5, 2004, 

3 the Secretary of Homeland Security shall designate Haiti 

4 under section 244(b) of the Immigration and Nationality 

5 Act (8 U.S.C. 1254a(b)). 

6 (b) SPECIAL RULE FOR ELIGIBILITY.—Notwith7 standing section 244(c) of the Immigration and Nation8 ality Act (8 U.S.C. 1254a(c)), no alien shall be eligible 

9 for temporary protected status pursuant to the designa10 tion made under subsection (a) unless the alien was phys11 ically present in the United States on February 25, 2004.

Æ
H. Res. 6

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

January 7, 1997.

Resolved, That pursuant to the Legislative Pay Act of

1929, as amended, the six minority employees authorized

therein shall be the following named persons, effective January 3, 1997, until otherwise ordered by the House, to wit:

Steve Elmendorf, George Kundanis, Marti Thomas, Sharon

Daniels, Dan Turton, and Laura Nichols, each to receive

gross compensation pursuant to the provisions of House Resolution 119, Ninety-fifth Congress, as enacted into permanent law by section 115 of Public Law 95–94. In addition,

the Minority Leader may appoint and set the annual rate of

pay for up to three further minority employees.

Attest:

Clerk.
NVLAP ASSESSOR BULLETIN AB-21-2018 PAGE 1 OF 1

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and Technology

National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program

ISSUE DATE:

February 28, 2018

ASSESSOR BULLETIN NUMBER: AB-21-2018

LAP: ALL

SUBJECT: Launch of the nonconformity functionality for assessments in the Assessor Portal

The purpose of this bulletin is to announce the NVLAP launch of the nonconformity functionality in 

the Assessor Portal. 

This functionality allows for the nonconformity/comment reports to be generated and submitted 

within the laboratory’s assessment record of the NVLAP Interactive Website (NIWS). The creation 

of the nonconformity/comment reports through the NIWS allows the laboratories to utilize this 

functionality for submitting their nonconformity responses.

Beginning on March 5, 2018, all assessments performed will be required to create the 

nonconformity report within the lab record. This report is created by selecting the NonConformity/Comment Reports within the laboratory’s assessment record. 

Each nonconformity or comment created will be cited against a criteria item (HB150, program 

specific checklist), test method, or other criteria (e.g. internal laboratory documents). Once the 

nonconformity or comment is documented, it will be saved to be included in the report 

submission.

At the completion of the assessment, the nonconformity report will be submitted by selecting 

Submit Non-Conformity Report on the Non-Conformity/Comment screen, prior to selecting 

Submit Assessment. When the assessment is submitted, the laboratory will be notified that the 

nonconformities have been submitted to their assessment record, and they will be using the 

interactive lab portal to provide responses and supporting documentation.

Please contact your program manager if you have any questions regarding the use of the 

nonconformity functionality for capturing any nonconformities cited during an assessment.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 32.2
                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

                 (SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

I, YU-EN CHIU, Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of Kid
Castle Educational Corporation (the "Registrant"), certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
period ended June 30, 200 of the Registrant (the "Report"):

(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 Registrant.

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

                                                   /s/ Yu-En Chiu
                                       -------------------------------------
                                       Name: Yu-En Chiu
                                       Date: August 13, 2004

Exhibit 32.2                          -1-
#### David C. HARTY, Petitioner, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Respondent.

No. 04-3345.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Nov. 29, 2004.

ORDER

The petitioner having failed to file the brief required by Federal Circuit Rule 31(a) within the time permitted by the rules, it is

ORDERED that the petition for review be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

Illinois State Rifle Association, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−04270

Honorable Mary M. Rowland

Brendan F. Kelly, et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Tuesday, July 20, 2021:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: Response to Defendants'

motion to dismiss Intervenor−Plaintiffs' amended complaint in intervention [98] due

8/17/21; reply due 9/7/21. The court will rule by mail. Mailed notice. (dm, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-04270 Document #: 101 Filed: 07/20/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:580
EXHIBIT 10.3

                               FIRST AMENDMENT TO
                          SECURITIES PURCHASE AGREEMENT

     FIRST AMENDMENT TO SECURITIES PURCHASE AGREEMENT (the "First Amendment")
dated as of June 8, 2004 by and between Mace Security International, Inc. (the
"Company") and Langley Partners, L.P. (the "Purchaser"), to be effective for all
purposes as of May 26, 2004.


                                   BACKGROUND

     A. The Company and the Purchaser are parties to a Securities Purchase
Agreement dated as of May 26, 2004 (the "Securities Purchase Agreement").

     B. The parties desire to amend the Securities Purchase Agreement as set
forth herein.

          NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, agreements
     and covenants set forth herein, and for other good and valuable
     consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
     acknowledged, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, hereby
     agree as follows:

     1. Amendments to the Purchase Agreement.

          1.1 The first recital of the Securities Purchase Agreement is hereby
     amended to replace the reference to "$5,000,000" with "$5,005,050."

          1.2 Section 2.1 of the Securities Purchase Agreement is hereby amended
     to replace the reference to "$5,000,000" with "$5,005,050."

          1.3 Annex A to the Securities Purchase Agreement is hereby amended to
     replace the reference to "$5,000,000" with "$5,005,050."

     2. Ratification of Securities Purchase Agreement. Except as specifically
amended hereby, all of the terms and conditions of the Securities Purchase
Agreement shall be in full force and effect. All references to the Securities
Purchase Agreement in any other document or instrument shall be deemed to mean
such Securities Purchase Agreement as amended by this First Amendment. The
parties hereto agree to be bound by the terms and obligations of the Securities
Purchase Agreement, as amended by this First Amendment, as though the terms and
obligations of the Securities Purchase Agreement were set forth herein.

     3. Counterparts. This First Amendment may be executed in several
counterparts each of which shall be an original and all of which taken together
shall constitute a single instrument.


<PAGE>


     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this First Amendment has been executed as of the day
and year first above written.

                                       MACE SECURITY INTERNATIONAL, INC.


                                       By: /s/ Robert Kramer
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Name: Robert Kramer
                                           Title: Executive Vice President


                                       LANGLEY PARTNERS, L.P.

                                       By: Langley Capital, LLC, general partner


                                           By: /s/ Jeffrey Thorp
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              Name: Jeffrey Thorp
                                              Title: Managing Member
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, CHICAGO DIVISION 

United States, ) 

) 

) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

v. ) 1:20-cr-00309-1 

) 

Larry Jones, ) Honorable Virginia M. Kendall, 

) Judge Presiding 

 Defendant. ) 

AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL 

Notice is hereby given that Defendant, LARRY JONES, hereby appeals to the 

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit from the final judgment 

entered on July 25, 2023, sentencing him to 188 months of incarceration. 

DATED: November 27, 2023 (nunc pro tunc to August 4, 2023) 

Respectfully submitted,

s/ Debra Loevy 

Debra Loevy 

Attorney for Defendant 

Debra Loevy 

Loevy + Loevy 

311 N. Aberdeen, 3rd floor 

Chicago, IL 60607 

(312) 243-5900
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 

I, Debra Loevy, hereby certify that I served the foregoing on November 27, 

2023, using the CM/ECF system, which effected service on all counsel of record for 

the Government and present defense counsel. 

DATED: November 27, 2023 

 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, 

 

/s/ Debra Loevy 

Debra Loevy 

Debra Loevy 

LOEVY & LOEVY 

311 North Aberdeen St., 3rd Fl. 

Chicago, Illinois 60607 

(312) 243-5900
#### Gale S. NELSON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Respondent.

No. 03-3273.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Dec. 15, 2004.

ON MOTION

LINN, Circuit Judge.

*ORDER*

Gale S. Nelson moves for reconsideration of this court’s July 23, 2004 order dismissing her appeal for failure to file a joint appendix, with joint appendix attached.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion is granted, the mandate is recalled, the July 23, 2004 order is vacated, the petition for review is reinstated, and the case is ready for assignment to an oral argument calendar.
I 

★

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3861

To amend part C of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to prohibit 

the operation of the Medicare comparative cost adjustment (CCA) program in Texas. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 26, 2004

Mr. RODRIGUEZ (for himself, Mr. SANDLIN, Mr. HINOJOSA, Mr. ORTIZ, Mr. 

FROST, Mr. TURNER of Texas, Mr. GREEN of Texas, Mr. BELL, Mr. 

DOGGETT, Mr. EDWARDS, Mr. REYES, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, and 

Mr. GONZALEZ) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee 

on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 

the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL

To amend part C of title XVIII of the Social Security Act 

to prohibit the operation of the Medicare comparative 

cost adjustment (CCA) program in Texas.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 3861 IH1S 

1 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON OPERATION OF MEDICARE 

2 COMPARATIVE COST ADJUSTMENT (CCA) 

3 PROGRAM IN TEXAS. 

4 Section 1860C–1(b)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 

5 U.S.C. 1395w–29(b)(2)), as added by section 241(a) of 

6 the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Mod7 ernization Act of 2003 (Public Law 108–173), is amended 

8 by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: 

9 ‘‘(C) NO PART IN TEXAS.—No part of the 

10 MSA is in Texas.’’.

Æ
IV

House Calendar No. 226

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 499

[Report No. 105–623]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3682) to amend title 18, United

States Code, to prohibit taking minors across State lines to avoid laws

requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 14, 1998

Mrs. MYRICK, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution;

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3682) to amend

title 18, United States Code, to prohibit taking minors

across State lines to avoid laws requiring the involvement

of parents in abortion decisions.

1 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution

2 it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R.

3 3682) to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit

4 taking minors across State lines to avoid laws requiring

5 the involvement of parents in abortion decisions. The bill

6 shall be considered as read for amendment. The amend-
2

HRES 499 RH

1 ment recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary

2 now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. The

3 previous question shall be considered as ordered on the

4 bill, as amended, to final passage without intervening mo5 tion except: (1) two hours of debate on the bill, as amend6 ed, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and

7 ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judici8 ary; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without in9 structions.

House Calendar No. 226

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 499

[Report No. 105–623]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3682)

abortion decisions.laws requiring the involvement of parents inhibit taking minors across State lines to avoidto amend title 18, United States Code, to proJULY 14, 1998

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 10

- 002 4 9

- CV

IN RE RICHARD DALE BUSWELL RELATOR

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

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

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

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of

the opinion that relator’s petition should be denied

. 2 Accordingly, relator’s

petition for writ of mandamus is denied

.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MCCOY , J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and MEIER, J.

DELIVERED: J uly 2 3 , 2010

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4, 52.8(d).

2 The trial court and the district clerk’s office have advised this court that they do not have any record that relator has filed a motion for judgment nunc pro tunc. Because relator’s motion has never been received by the trial court, Respondent

has not be en provided an opportunity to rule upon the motion. Presentment of the motion to the trial court is a prerequisite to mandamus relief. See O’Connor v. First Court of Appeals , 837 S.W.2d 94, 97 (Tex. 1992).
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Javier BARRERA-GALAN, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 04-10150.

D.C. No. CR-03-00331-LDJ/RJJ.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.*

Decided Dec. 13, 2004.

Robert A. Bork, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Arthur L. Allen, Anne R. Traum, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

Javier Barrera-Galan appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to unlawful reentry of a deported alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

Barrera-Galan’s contention that the entire federal Sentencing Guidelines are unconstitutional under *Blakely v. Washington,*— U.S. -, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), is foreclosed by *United States v. Ameline,*376 F.3d 967, 981-82 (9th Cir.2004) (declining invitation to declare Guidelines as a whole unconstitutional after *Blakely).*

Barrera-Galan’s contention that the district court erred under *Blakely*by applying a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii) for a prior crime of violence, without proof to a jury or an admission by Barrera-Galan, is foreclosed by *United States v. Quintana-Quintana,*383 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir.2004) (order) (observing that *Blakely*preserved the rule that a § 2L1.2 sentencing enhancement based on a prior conviction need not be presented to a jury).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### Jorge Luis FLORES-SANTOS; Emmanuel Flores-Santos, Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

Nos. 03-72931, [ AXX-XXX-XXX ], [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.*

Decided Dec. 20, 2004.

Jorge Luis Flores-Santos, Fontana, CA, pro se.

*611Emmanuel Flores-Santos, Fontana, CA, pro se.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Richard M. Evans, John L. Davis, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

Jorge Luis Flores-Santos and his brother, Emmanuel Flores-Santos, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their applications for suspension of deportation. To the degree we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). *See Kalaw v. INS,*133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997). We review for substantial evidence a factual determination regarding an alien’s failure to satisfy the continuous physical presence requirement, *id.*at 1151, and we review de novo constitutional challenges, *Ram v. INS,*243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir.2001). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We reject petitioners’ contention that the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act violates equal protection by treating differently aliens of various nationalities. *See id.*at 517.

We also reject petitioners’ contention that section 309(c)(5) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act makes the stop-time rule inapplicable to aliens in deportation proceedings. *See id.*at 516. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that petitioners did not demonstrate seven years of continuous physical presence. *See Kalaw,*133 F.3d at 1151.

We do not consider petitioners’ contention regarding hardship because the agency did not make a hardship determination and, in any event, we would lack jurisdiction to review such a determination. *See id.*at 1152.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

**

 This disposition, is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.