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

<ARTICLE>                                  5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                               1,000

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                      1,419
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                               2,235
<ALLOWANCES>                                   43
<INVENTORY>                                   219
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            4,281
<PP&E>                                    125,930
<DEPRECIATION>                             57,110
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             75,100
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       5,853
<BONDS>                                         0
<COMMON>                                       75
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         796
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<OTHER-SE>                                 15,081
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               75,100
<SALES>                                    11,830
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           12,041
<CGS>                                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              12,248
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          4,424
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,631)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,631)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,002)
<EPS-BASIC>                                 (0.64)
<EPS-DILUTED>                               (0.64)




</TABLE>
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4217 

To amend title 32, United States Code, to rename the National Guard 

Challenge Program as the National Guard Youth Challenge Program, 

to increase the maximum Federal share of the costs of State programs 

under the National Youth Guard Challenge Program, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 22, 2004 

Mr. WILSON of South Carolina (for himself, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. 

JOHN, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. CASE, Mr. JEFFERSON, Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. BAKER, Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr. WALDEN of 

Oregon, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. MCCRERY, and Mr. YOUNG of Alaska) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed 

Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 32, United States Code, to rename the National Guard Challenge Program as the National Guard 

Youth Challenge Program, to increase the maximum 

Federal share of the costs of State programs under the 

National Youth Guard Challenge Program, and for other 

purposes. 

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

•HR 4217 IH 

1 SECTION 1. NATIONAL GUARD YOUTH CHALLENGE PRO2 GRAM. 

3 (a) MAXIMUM FEDERAL SHARE OF COSTS OF STATE

4 PROGRAMS.—Subsection (d) of section 509 of title 32, 

5 United States Code, is amended to read as follows: 

6 ‘‘(d) MATCHING FUNDS REQUIRED.—The amount of 

7 assistance provided under this section to a State program 

8 of the National Guard Youth Challenge Program may not 

9 exceed— 

10 ‘‘(1) for fiscal year 2005, 65 percent of the 

11 costs of operating the State program during that 

12 year; 

13 ‘‘(2) for fiscal year 2006, 70 percent of the 

14 costs of operating the State program during that 

15 year; 

16 ‘‘(3) for fiscal year 2007 and each subsequent 

17 fiscal year, 75 percent of the costs of operating the 

18 State program during that year.’’. 

19 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Sub20 section (b)(2) of such section is amended by striking ‘‘in 

21 fiscal year 2001 or 2002 may not exceed $62,500,000’’ 

22 and inserting ‘‘in fiscal year 2005 may not exceed 

23 $82,593,200’’. 

24 (c) REDESIGNATION OF PROGRAM.—Such section is 

25 further amended by striking ‘‘National Guard Challenge 
3 

•HR 4217 IH 

1 Program’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘National 

2 Guard Youth Challenge Program’’. 

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM (A)
UNAUDITED INTERIM STATEMENTS FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH (B) QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM
10-QSB FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 1996.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1996
<CASH>                                       1,568,762
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,866
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    142,118
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,788,528
<PP&E>                                         624,438
<DEPRECIATION>                                 333,792
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,520,493
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          165,394
<BONDS>                                      1,050,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           304
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,310,292
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,520,493
<SALES>                                         19,362
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                19,362
<CGS>                                           13,583
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,583
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,227,975
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,202,485)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,202,485)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,202,485)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.05)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOUND ON
PAGES 1 AND 2 OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           4,088
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       25
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (1)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,173
<PP&E>                                           1,384
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,082)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,475
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              447
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           200
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,828
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,475
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,631)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,631)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      21
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,610)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.29)


</TABLE>
10904.

#### Goen *v.*The State.

Decided November 5, 1919.

Indictment for larceny from house; from Spalding superior court—Judge Searcy. August 4, 1919.

*O. L. Redman,*for plaintiff in error.

*F. M. Owen, solicitor-general,*contra.

Broyles, C. J.

1. A special ground of a motion for a new trial must be complete within itself. The 2d special ground of the motion for a new trial in the instant ease is as follows: “2. Because the court failed to charge the law of circumstantial evidence.” In this ground it is not even alleged that the defendant’s conviction depended wholly upon circumstantial evidence; consequently the ground can not be considered.

2. The evidence failed to show definitely how recent was the possession of the stolen property. It does, however, appear from the record that the goods were stolen in September, 1918, and that the defendant was indicted in January, 1919. The defendant’s conviction, however, did not depend entirely upon his recent possession of the stolen goods, but the evidence showed other incriminatory facts, and therefore the defendant’s conviction was not contrary to the following ruling in *Calloway*v. *State,*111 *Ga.*832 (36 S. E. 63), cited by counsel for the plaintiff in error: “While recent possession of stolen goods unexplained will justify a conviction for larceny, the mere possession of goods several months subsequent to the time they were alleged to have been stolen and the failure to satisfactorily account for such possession will not *alone*authorize a conviction.” (Italics ours.)

3. The verdict was authorized by the evidence, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.*
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 225 (Friday, November 21, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69501-69502]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27561]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which

[[Page 69502]]

would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis 
Panel; Neuropharmacology.
    Date: December 12, 2014.
    Time: 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Richard D. Crosland, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of 
Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4190, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 
20892, 301-435-1220, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#82e1f0edf1eee3ece6c2ecebeaace5edf4"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ed8e9f829e818c8389ad838485c38a829b">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis 
Panel; Neuropsychiatric Mechanisms.
    Date: December 12, 2014.
    Time: 12:30 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Deborah L. Lewis, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of 
Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4183, MSC 7850, Bethesda, MD 
20892, 301-408-9129, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#38545d4f514b5c5d5a785b4b4a16565150165f574e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fb979e8c92889f9e99bb988889d5959293d59c948d">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 
93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS).

    Dated: November 17, 2014.
Melanie J. Gray,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-27561 Filed 11-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21
- 1965

BRYCE GERALD RANDALL NOWLAN , Petitioner

- Appellee ,

v. NINA LYNN NOWLAN, f/k/a Nina Lynn Brown , Respondent

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Harrisonburg

. Thomas T. Cullen , District Judge. ( 5:20

- cv - 00102

- TTC )

Submitted : December 6, 2021 Decided: January 4, 2022

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Paul G. Beers, GLENN, FELDMANN, DARBY & GOODLATTE, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. Steph en J. Cullen, Kelly A. Powers, MILES & STOCKBRIDGE P.C., Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Unpublis hed opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Nina Lynn Nowlan (“Nina”) appeals the district court’s order granting Bryce Gerald Randall Nowlan’s (“Bryce”) Petition for Return of the Child under the Hague Convention on the Civil As pects of International Child Abduction. The court determined that the Nowlans’ child, AEN, was a habitual resident of Canada when Nina took AEN to Virginia. The court further determined that Nina did not show by clear and convincing evidence that
AEN wou ld be in grave risk of harm if AEN was returned to Canada to live with Bryce

. We affirm. A child’s habitual residence is a mixed question of law and fact

. Monasky v. Taglieri , 140 S. Ct. 719, 730 (2020). The first issue is whether the district court identified “the governing totality

- of

- the

- circumstances standard.” Id . The second issue involves answering a factual question: “Was the child at home in the particular country at issue.” Id . Our review of the district court’s decision is for clear erro r. Id . We conclude that the district court applied the correct legal standard and did not clearly err in determining that AEN’s habitual residence was Canada when Nina took AEN to Virginia. We further conclude that the district court did not err in dete rmining that Nina did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that AEN would be in grave risk of harm if the child was returned to Canada. See Miller v. Miller , 240 F.3d 392, 402 (4th Cir. 2001) (stating burden of proof). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Nowlan v. Nowlan , No. 5:20

- cv - 00102

- TTC (W.D. Va. June 10, 2021). We dispense with oral3 argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argumen t would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
November 2000 

L&R Committee to Consider Proposal Affecting E-Commerce 

and Catalog Sales 

By Joan Koenig and Tom Coleman 

The Food Marketing Institute (FMI) has submitted a proposal to the NCWM Laws and 

Regulations Committee (L&R Committee) that would affect the labeling of random 

packages manufactured or produced and offered for indirect sale. FMI defines "indirect 

sales" as including all forms of retail sales where the customer is not physically present at 

the time and location of product selection and order (e.g., sales through e-commerce, 

catalogs, telephone, and fax). The L&R Committee will consider the proposal at the 

NCWM Interim Meeting in Arizona in January 2001. 

FMI is proposing that Section 11.1., Random Packages, in the Uniform Packaging and 

Labeling Regulation of NIST Handbook 130 be amended to exempt random packages 

offered for indirect sale from being labeled with unit price and total price when certain 

requirements are met. Specifically, at the time of delivery each package would have to 

be marked with a statement of net weight and the following conditions would have to be 

met: 

(a) The unit price is set forth and established in the initial product offering; 

(b) the maximum possible net weight, unit price, and maximum possible price are 

provided to the customer by order confirmation when the product is ordered; and 

(c) when the product is delivered, a receipt bearing the following information is 

presented: product identity, net weight, unit price, and total price. 

According to FMI, the current provision requiring the unit price and total price to be 

displayed on a random package is difficult for on-line retailers to meet because the unit 

price may vary from package to package depending on the order date. As a consequence, 

the retailer may be required to re-program the labeling equipment for each product 

ordered on a different date or to develop a complex and costly system to separate 

products by price as well as weight. In addition, FMI suggests that providing unit price 

and total price information on the label of random weight products offered for indirect 

sale is less meaningful because consumers will not see the package label until after the 

product is delivered. 

For a copy of the complete proposal and background information, see NCWM 

Publication 15, NCWM Interim Meeting Agenda, which will be sent to all NCWM 

members and will be available on the OWM web site (www.nist.gov/owm) in December. 

Written comments on the proposal may be submitted to L&R Committee Technical 

Advisor Tom Coleman (Office of Weights and Measures, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive STOP 

2350, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-2350). For information on the NCWM Interim Meeting, 

contact NCWM Headquarters (240-632-9454).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                  5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED 
FROM THE COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS 
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                               1,000
                                           
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                        834
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                               2,962
<ALLOWANCES>                                    8
<INVENTORY>                                   392
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            4,244
<PP&E>                                     93,653
<DEPRECIATION>                             30,133
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             67,996
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       9,663
<BONDS>                                         0
<COMMON>                                       70
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       1,326
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<OTHER-SE>                                 39,954
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               67,996
<SALES>                                     9,602
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            9,688
<CGS>                                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               9,413
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            620
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (345)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (345)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (435)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                (.06)
        



</TABLE>