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

<ARTICLE>                5
<LEGEND>                 THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION
                         EXTRACT  ED FROM  ANR  PIPELINE  COMPANY  FORM  10-K
                         ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996
                         AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY  REFERENCE TO
                         SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                1,000,000
       
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                       DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                             34
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     253
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                        30
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  318
<PP&E>                                          3,314
<DEPRECIATION>                                  2,110
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  1,676
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             279
<BONDS>                                           506
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                        586
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    1,676
<SALES>                                            39
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  762
<CGS>                                              69
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     476
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 60
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   226
<INCOME-TAX>                                       86
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               140
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 (164)
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (24)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0092

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL DUNNE,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including June 23, 2021, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 18 2021

05/18/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0092
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-10-0000225

31-JAN-2014

08:42 AM
EDWARD A. BARTOLOMEI

BARTLAW2003@YAHOO.COM

February 17.2015

Law Offices Of

WARD A. BARTOLOMEI, RL.L.C.

Attorney and Counselor at Law

530 Lexington Avenue

San Antonio, Texas 78215 ROXANA REYES

Paralegals

BARTLAW2003LA@YAHOO.COM

Telephone (210) 225-0393

Facsimile (210) 227-8529 SYLVIA ALMAGUER

Firm Investigator

(210) 523-0505

Mr. John Brown

Chief Deputy Clerk

Court ofCriminal Appeals

PO Box 12308. Capitol Station

Austin, Texas 78711

RE: IN THE MATTER OF THE STATE OF TEXAS vs. MICHAEL ERIC RENDON

CCA NO. PD-0015-15, COA NO. 13-13-00666-CR

TRIAL COURT CASE NO. 12-8-26806-D

Dear Mr. Brown,

Pursuant to your instruciions this morning regarding your letter of February 6, 2015

concerning the above referenced matter; please be advised that I will not be representing Mr.

Rendon on PDR in this case. Mr. Rendon has retained Mr. Edward Shaughnessy to represent

him in this matter. Mr. Shaughnessy will be entering his appearance by a separate notice of

appearance.

Very truly yours,

THE LXW OFFICE

EDWAR0 A. BA^fOLQMEl/P.L.L.C.

EAB/rr

cc: file

ARTOLOMEI

Concerned, Committed, Qualified, Criminal Defense

PD-0015-15

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 2/17/2015 4:53:53 PM

Accepted 2/18/2015 7:33:48 AM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK
IIB 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4417 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 15, 2004 

Received 

JUNE 25, 2004 

Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

AN ACT 

To modify certain deadlines pertaining to machine-readable, 

tamper-resistant entry and exit documents. 

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

HR 4417 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF CERTAIN DEADLINES FOR 

2 MACHINE-READABLE, TAMPER-RESISTANT 

3 ENTRY AND EXIT DOCUMENTS. 

4 Section 303 of the Enhanced Border Security and 

5 Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 (8 U.S.C. 1732) is amend6 ed, in each of subsections (b)(2)(A), (c)(1), and (c)(2), by 

7 striking ‘‘2004,’’ and inserting ‘‘2005,’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 14, 2004. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS,
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS AS OF AND FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 SHOWN ELSEWHERE IN THIS REPORT AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          38,372
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,001,574
<ALLOWANCES>                                   516,233
<INVENTORY>                                  5,048,721
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            12,354,028
<PP&E>                                       3,249,390
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,232,390
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,761,640
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,943,391
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        40,002
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,083,858
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,761,640
<SALES>                                     14,495,239
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            14,495,239
<CGS>                                       10,433,944
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,643,412
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               120,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             256,193
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,363,498)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,363,498)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,363,498)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.59)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.59)
        

</TABLE>
|   | 3) | the                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 4) | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                  |                                       |                                                   |
|---------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|
| Dated:              February 14, 2007 |                                            | /s/              LOWELL              W. GIFFHORN  |
|                                  | Lowell W. Giffhorn Chief Financial Officer |

----
1

NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION SAFETY TEAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE (NCSTAC) MEETING

Administration Building, Lecture Room D, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD 20899

September 7, 2023

AGENDA

MEETING GOALS:

● Review Disaster and Failure Studies Program Scoring of Events and Readiness of Teams,

● Review the status of the NCST investigation of Hurricane Maria’s effects on Puerto Rico,

● Review the status of the NCST investigation of the partial collapse of Champlain Towers South in 

Surfside, Florida,

● Develop the Committee’s annual report to Congress.

September 7, 2023

Time (ET) Topic Discussion Leader

Opening Remarks

9:00 am – 9:05 am Call to Order

Roll Call 

Tina Faecke

Designated Federal Officer

NIST

9:05 am – 9:15 am Welcome

Opening Remarks 

Laurie Locascio

Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Standards and Technology and

NIST Director

9:15 am – 9:30 am Meeting Goals

Review of Agenda

Ross Corotis

NCSTAC Chairperson

Professor Emeritus

University of Colorado Boulder

9:30 am – 9:45 am Disaster and Failure Studies Program 

Updates

Tanya Brown-Giammanco

Director, Disaster & Failure Studies

NIST

9:45 am – 9:55 am Committee Discussion of the Disaster 

and Failure Studies Program Updates

Ross Corotis

Hurricane Maria NCST Update

9:55 am – 10:30 am Summary of Hurricane Maria NCST 

Investigation Progress

Joseph Main

Team Lead, Hurricane Maria NCST

NIST

Maria Dillard

Associate Team Lead, Hurricane Maria 

NCST

NIST

10:30 am – 10:50 am Committee Discussion of the Hurricane 

Maria Summary

Ross Corotis

10:50 am – 11:05 am BREAK Tina Faecke
2

Champlain Towers South NCST Update

11:05 am – 11:45 am Summary of Champlain Towers South 

NCST Investigation Overview

Judith Mitrani-Reiser

Team Lead, Champlain Towers South 

NCST

NIST

Glenn Bell

Associate Team Lead, Champlain 

Towers South NCST

NIST

11:45 am – 12:05 pm Committee Discussion of the Champlain 

Towers South NCST Investigation 

Progress

Ross Corotis

12:05 pm – 1:15 pm LUNCH Tina Faecke

Closing Business

1:15 pm – 1:35 pm Public Comment Period Tina Faecke

1:35 pm – 1:45 pm Closing Remarks Joannie Chin

Director, Engineering Lab

NIST

1:45 pm – 3:45 pm NCSTAC Preparation of Annual Report to 

Congress

Ross Corotis

3:45 pm ADJOURN Tina Faecke
Exhibit 32.2CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002     I, Kenneth L. Hignett, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary ofMorgan’s Foods, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that: (1) The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended February 26,2006 (the “Report”), which this certification accompanies, fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.              /s/ Kenneth L. Hignett   Kenneth L. Hignett, Senior Vice President,   Chief Financial Officer and Secretary   June 14, 2006
#### James M. Bowman et al. *v.*H. R. Tanklin & Son.

Fraudulent Conveyances — Preference of Creditors.

Where an insolvent debtor had no property, except a house and lot, that could be reached by his creditors, and he conveyed that to a favored creditor, making no provisions for any one else, the transaction comes within the statute against fraudulent conveyances.

APPEAL FROM FLEMING CIRCUIT COURT.

January 23, 1874.

*460*Phister, for appellants.*

*. Given, Johnson, for appellees.*

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay :

It is evident that this is a proceeding under the provisions of the act of 1856. No charge of actual fraud is made. The ground of complaint is the attempt upon the part of John N. Bowman to prefer one or more creditors to the exclusion of others, it being charged that this attempt was made in contemplation of insolvency. The answer does not controvert the material facts from which the conclusion that the intention of the conveyance was to prefer James M. Bowman, was drawn. In fact, the conveyance shows upon its face that such was the intention. The denial of the insolvency of John N. at the time it was executed, is insufficient. • The charge is that he was then “wholly insolvent.” It is denied that he was “wholly insolvent.” Importance is thus attached to the superfluous and unnecessary objection. If he was practically insolvent, if he had no property, except the house and lot, that could be reached by his creditors through the ordinary remedies provided by law for the benefit of creditors, and he conveyed this house and lot to a favored creditor, making no provision for anyone else, the court had the right, in fact, was bound to conclude that the transaction came within the inhibitions of the act to prevent fraudulent conveyances, and should have proceeded as directed by that act. It was error, however, to declare the deed void, and subject the property to the payment of the debt of Franklin & Son, thereby giving them the very advantage the act of 1856 was intended to provide against. For this error the judgment is reversed arid the cause remanded for further proceedings as herein indicated.
Exhibit 31.2
**CERTIFICATIONS**
     I, Arthur S. Rosten, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of AMDL, Inc.
     2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annualreport;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this annual report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of thesmall business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this annualreport;
     4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal controlover financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and15d-15(f) for the small business issuer and have:
     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the small businessissuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis annual report is being prepared;
     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this annual reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annual reportbased on such evaluation; and
     c) disclosed in this report any change in the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the smallbusiness issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and
     5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officers and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the auditcommittee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):
     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and
     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: November 12, 2004
/S/  ARTHUR S. ROSTENArthur S. RostenChief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           2,435
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,948
<ALLOWANCES>                                       363
<INVENTORY>                                      5,302
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                40,901
<PP&E>                                         216,073
<DEPRECIATION>                                 126,276
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 130,929
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           24,452
<BONDS>                                         34,125
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,763
<OTHER-SE>                                      47,651
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   130,929
<SALES>                                        172,013
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               172,013
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  155,212
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,334
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,552
<INCOME-TAX>                                       768
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                784
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       784
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

SONYA BYRD, :

Plaintiff, :

vs. : CA 08-0584-KD-B

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, :

Commissioner of Social Security, 

:

Defendant.

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to

the issues raised, and there having been no objections filed, the recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(B) and dated April 13, 2010 is

ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.

DONE this May 5, 2010.

s/ Kristi K. DuBose 

KRISTI K. DuBOSE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-00584-KD-B Document 26 Filed 05/05/10 Page 1 of 1
#### Ebenezer Duff *v.*Samuel McElveney.

Appeal — Reversal—Fraud or Mistake.

Where by fraud or mistake the consideration expressed in a deed is much less than the purchaser is bound to pay, a judgment compelling (the purchaser to accept the deed will be reversed.

Judicial Sales — What Property Passes.

Where .an amended pleading asks' for the sale of land omitted from the boundary by mistake and the judgment directs the land to be sold, title to the whole tract passed to the purchaser.

APPEAL FROM LEWIS CIRCUIT COURT.

December 14, 1872.

*211Phister, *for appellant.*

Thomas, *for appellee.*

Opinion by

Judge Pryor:

The amended pleading filed by the appellee fails to allege either fraud or mistake in reducing the contract evidencing the sale of the land to writing. The bond' is for fifty acres of land described by specified metes and bounds and this alone is subject to the vendor’s lien. The failure of-the appellant to answer either the original or amended pleading would not have authorized a payment by default including the twelve acers of land not embraced by the boundary. This twelve acres was the most valuable portion of the whole tract, and if sold, some reason must be alleged for failing to include it in the bond for title. The appellant was also entitled to a general warranty deed from the heirs of Gully to the extent of assets discovered before judgment against him requiring a payment of the purchase money. Riley, who was the vendor of Gully, and in whom was vested the legal title at Gully’s death, does not by the execution of his deed directly to the appellant for the land, satisfy the claim that the latter has upon Gully’s heirs for a warranty of title. The consideration expressed in the deed from. Riley to the appellant is only $12.50, whilst the consideration paid and to be paid by the appellant is two hundred and twenty-five dollars; nevertheless the court requires the appellant to accept Riley’s deed, and if he should be evicted or lose his land by a superior title the measure of damages would be twelve dollars, and fifty cents when he has paid or is required to pay greatly more for it. There is nothing in the record showing that Thomas, the purchaser of the land, is the sarnie person who was the attorney of the appellee. The brief of counsel so states, but the record does not show this fact, and if he is, the remedy for setting aside the sale is by an amended pleading. He is no party to this appeal, and the sale having been confirmed, he is vested with the title. The appellee, having by the amended pleading asked the sale of the twelve acres, as well as the fifty, and the judgment directing all to be sold, the title to. the whole passed to the purchaser, admitting that the judgment is erroneous.

The judgment is *reversed*and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
The HO NORABLE GEORGE F. GUNN, JR., late a United States Distric t 1 Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendations of the HO NORABLE DAVID D. NOCE, United States Magistrate Judge for th e Eastern District of Missouri.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-3668

___________ Donnie E. Blankenship, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. Michael Groose, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: November 6, 1998 Filed: November 9, 1998

___________ Before FAGG, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Do nnie Blankenship appeals from the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C
. 1 § 2254 petition. Having carefully reviewed the record, includingthe magistrate judge’s thorough thirty-nine page report and recommendation, as well as the parties ’ submissions, we affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons set forth in the report and recommendation adopted by the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We-2-

also deny Blankenship’s motions for appointment of counsel and access to a law clerk, and deny the government’s motion to quash the certificate of appealability. Accordingly, we affirm. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.