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


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND THE CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         687,623
<SECURITIES>                                 3,000,045
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,002,811
<ALLOWANCES>                                   151,750
<INVENTORY>                                  1,595,962
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,786,631
<PP&E>                                       2,562,933
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,580,800
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,150,867
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,921,700
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       641,093
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,448,074
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,150,867
<SALES>                                     10,962,844
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,962,844
<CGS>                                        3,548,883
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,548,883
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,970,049
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,443,912
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,170,930
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,272,982
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,272,982
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.35



</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-6212

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

VICTOR ALEXANDER HOLT,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III,

Chief District Judge. (5:11-cr-00002-D-1; 5:12-cv-00075-D)

Submitted: May 13, 2015 Decided: May 18, 2015

Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Victor Alexander Holt, Appellant Pro Se. Kristine L. Fritz, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Jennifer P. May-Parker, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Victor Alexander Holt seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B)

(2012). 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) (2012). 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 motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

As the lone issue presented in this appeal is squarely 

foreclosed by our recent decision in United States v. Foote, __ 

F.3d __, 2015 WL 1883538 (4th Cir. Apr. 27, 2015), we conclude 

that Holt has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability, deny Holt’s motions for 

appointment of counsel, and dismiss the appeal. We also deny 
3

Holt’s motion for relief pursuant to the panel decision in 

Whiteside v. United States, 748 F.3d 541 (4th Cir. 2014), which 

has been superseded by the opinion of the en banc court, see

Whiteside v. United States, 775 F.3d 180 (4th Cir. 2014), and 

United States v. Simmons, 649 F.3d 237 (4th Cir. 2011), because 

a Simmons-based challenge to a federal prisoner’s sentence is 

not cognizable in a § 2255 proceeding. See Foote, 2015 WL 

1883538, at *1, *12. We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<CURRENCY> USD

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                     103,215,704
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,278,656
<ALLOWANCES>                                   483,973
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           111,730,634
<PP&E>                                       2,902,839
<DEPRECIATION>                                 170,891
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             114,782,918
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,941,191
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       192,502
<OTHER-SE>                                 109,649,225
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               114,782,918
<SALES>                                      6,746,092
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,746,092
<CGS>                                        1,488,220
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,488,220
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,408,860
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,215,734
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (935,254)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (935,254)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (935,254)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.05)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 23.1

                    CONSENT OF MENDOZA BERGER & COMPANY, LLP
                    INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference and use in the Annual Report on
Form 10 KSB, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 of our report on the
consolidated financial statements of Trinity 3 Corporation for the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the consolidated financial statements for the
period from inception (April 26, 2000) through December 31, 2003.

/s/ Mendoza Berger & Company, LLP
-----------------------------------
Mendoza Berger & Company, LLP
Irvine, California

Dated: April 14, 2004
**CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350,**
 **AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**
 **OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 
 In
connection with the Annual Report of Trinity3 Corporation (the “Company”) on
Form 10-KSB for the quarter ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Shannon T. Squyres, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:
 
 (1)  The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2)  Information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 Dated:
      April 21, 2005
    /s/
      Shannon T. SquyresBy:
      Shannon T. SquyresIts:
      Chief Executive Officer
 
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Trinity3 Corporation and will be retained by Trinity3 Corporation and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### T. C. Bidwell, et al., *v.*James Fackler.

Statute of Frauds — Specific Performance — Description in Deed.

No action at law or suit in equity can be maintained to enforce a verbal contract for tbe sale of real estate, and bence the court cannot decree specific performance of such a contract.

Description in Deed.

Where a description in a deed is so vague and uncertain that the vendee cannot learn from it what land he takes under it, the deed is void for uncertainty.

APPEAL FROM BRECKENRIDGE CIRCUrT COURT.

September 29, 1874.

Opinion by

Judge Peters :

This court has held that the effect of the statute against frauds and perjuries is that no action at law, or suit in equity can be supported to enforce a verbal contract for the sale of land. The statute, therefore, withholds the remedy for an enforcement of the verbal contract for the sale of the land; the appellants cannot enforce a specific execution thereof, there being no consideration passing to appellee.

But independent of the statute, there are other reasons why the demurrer should have been sustained.

*98
      *Sweeney & Stuart, J. W. Kincheloe, for appellants.*

Williams, *Haswell, for appellee.*

The deed tendered in this case by appellants was not accepted; they fail in their petition to allege that they have a clear legal title to the land, and are able to make such a title to appellee. They do not allege that Porter had purchased the interest in the land from Mrs. Duvall, who, according to the recitals in the deed, is one of the children and heirs of John McFarlan, deceased, and entitled as such to one share in the land. It is merely alleged that Porter is entitled to two shares, and that Tompkins and wife had conveyed one share to him, but how or from whom he derived title for the other share is not alleged.

Besides description of the land as set forth in the deed is too vague and uncertain. The vendee cannot learn from the deed what land he takes under it, for the deed recites that the land must thereafter be surveyed to ascertain the boundary of the land, and its quantity, and no specific description is set forth in the petition.

One of the persons named as grantor is alleged to be a minor, and no indemnity or assurance is given that he will ratify the contract after he arrives at full age; and although he is named as a grantor in the body of the deed, he has not signed or acknowledged it.

The petition was therefore insufficient and the demurrer to the' same properly sustained. Wherefore the judgment is *affirmed.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM RESORTS
INTERNATIONAL HOTEL, INC.'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES THERETO
INCLUDED IN THE FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1996, EXCEPT AS NOTED
BELOW IN FOOTNOTE 3, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                         $39,931<F1>
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   $8,218
<ALLOWANCES>                                    $3,306
<INVENTORY>                                     $2,109
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               $55,328
<PP&E>                                        $221,487
<DEPRECIATION>                                 $66,858
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                $223,628
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          $33,675
<BONDS>                                       $128,083<F2>
<COMMON>                                        $1,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     $41,995
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  $223,628
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              $139,947<F3>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 $106,646<F3>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                $6,184<F4>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              $9,018
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                $(2,681)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            $(2,681)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   $(2,681)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>INCLUDES NON-RESTRICTED CASH EQUIVALENTS OF $24,053 AND RESTRICTED CASH
    EQUIVALENTS OF $750.
<F2>NET OF UNAMORTIZED DISCOUNTS.
<F3>CERTAIN RECLASSIFICATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE 1996 BALANCES TO CONFORM
    WITH CURRENT YEAR PRESENTATION.
<F4>DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### Mary Porter *v.*R. H. Field.

Married Women — Subrogation.

When a married woman is not liable on a note because of coverture, her surety on such a note, who pays the same, cannot recover from her. Since her creditor could not recover from her, her surety cannot.

APPEAL FROM BULLITT CIRCUIT COURT.

September 23, 1874.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay :

At the time Field became surety on the note to Dawson, Mrs. Porter owned no property, except the balance due on the Hoagland notes. These notes Field held in trust, and for the sole use of said Mary Porter, to be paid over to her in such sums as she might require. Her individual receipts were to be sufficient to relieve Field of the trust so far as the sums so paid were concerned. It is evident that Mrs. Porter did not intend to change this separate estate by the execution of the note to Dawson. But if she did there was but one way she could charge it, and that was by directing Field to pay the debt, and then execute to him her individual receipt as provided for in the deed of trust. This she did not do. It results, therefore, that Mrs. Porter was not personally bound to Dawson, because, being a *feme covert,*she could not bind herself by the execution of the note, and that her property was not bound to Field for the reasons already given.

Whatever may have been the legal effect of the conveyance by Field to Mrs. Porter, it did not raise a personal liability upon her part for a debt for which she was not theretofore bound, nor did it relate back to the date of the execution of the note to Dawson, and render separate estate (or the proceeds thereof), converted into general estate by such conveyance, liable to him, upon the ground that the horse purchased from him was a necessity.

*73
      *A. H. Field, for appellant.*

*R. H. Field, for appellee.*

As Dawson could not have asserted a claim against Mrs.- Porter’s property, Field cannot, under the doctrine of subrogation, subject it to the payment of his claim. He occupies no better attitude than Dawson did before Field paid the debt. But further than this, the testimony conduces to show that Mrs. Porter had no special use for the horse bought from Dawson. The entire estate of herself and husband did not much exceed one thousand dollars in value, and they then owned two horses. Judgment *reversed*and cause remanded with instructions to dismiss appellee’s petition.

As Mrs. Porter does not prosecute a cross-appeal, no attention need be paid to the dismissal of her cross-action.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

CHRISTOPHER CHARLES ROGERS, : 

 Plaintiff, : 

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 10-00011-CG-B 

CITY OF GULF SHORES POLICE : 

DEPARTMENT, et al., 

 : 

 Defendants. 

 : 

ORDER 

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

raised, and there having been no objections filed, the Report and Recommendation of the 

Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. '636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. 

 It is ORDERED that this action be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice for 

failure to prosecute and to obey the Court=s Order. 

DONE and ORDERED this 9th day of July, 2010. 

 /s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:10-cv-00011-CG-B Document 8 Filed 07/09/10 Page 1 of 1
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1635 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the amount of survivors’ 

and dependents’ educational assistance provided to an eligible individual 

pursuing a program of education at an institution in the Republic of 

the Philippines. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 17, 2023 

Mrs. KIGGANS of Virginia (for herself and Mr. LEVIN) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the 

amount of survivors’ and dependents’ educational assistance provided to an eligible individual pursuing a program of education at an institution in the Republic of 

the Philippines. 

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


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1635 IH

1 SECTION 1. INCREASE OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AF2 FAIRS EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR PRO3 GRAMS OF EDUCATION IN REPUBLIC OF 

4 PHILIPPINES. 

5 Section 3532 of title 38, United States Code, is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) by striking subsection (d); and 

8 (2) by resdesignating subsections (e) through 

9 (g) as subsections (d) through (f), respectively. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          30,394
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           2,299
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                11,949
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    221,268
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                              66
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                61
<LOANS>                                        247,406
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,841
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 549,784
<DEPOSITS>                                     489,740
<SHORT-TERM>                                     2,317
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,394
<LONG-TERM>                                      4,700
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             5
<OTHER-SE>                                      50,633
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 549,784
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 20,143
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               14,163
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 1,360
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                35,666
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              14,999
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 708
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           19,959
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      625
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             (1,640)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 17,586
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,362
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       4,362
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,738
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.66
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.64
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.55
<LOANS-NON>                                      2,095
<LOANS-PAST>                                       239
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  5,606
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,670
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      597
<RECOVERIES>                                       143
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,841
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,841
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          1,844


</TABLE>
United States Department of Com

National Institute of Standards and Technolo

Certificate of Metrological Traceability For: 

USDA/AMS/FGIS 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

Federal Grain Inspection Service 

___________Katrice LippNIST Office Effective Date

This laboratory has demonstrated evidence of an unbroken chain of metrological traceability of its standards to the international system of units (SI), maintains a documented calibration program, documented measurement uncertainties, uses documented measurement procedures, successfully completed training and proficiency tests, submitted a quality management system, 

and has demonstrated suitable measurement assurance for the Scope listed on this certificate. 

The Office of Weights and Measures Program assesses laboratories to NIST Handbook 143 - Program Handbook for State 

Weights and Measures Laboratories and ISO/IEC 17025:2017. 

Scope 

Mass Echelon III Railroad Test Cars

(Limited Availability) 110 000 lb to 80 000 lb10 000 lb1000 lb50 lb

25 lb

(Rev.: September 2021)