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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                    JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                      SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                             1
<CASH>                                 29,210
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                263,196
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                       11,475
<TRADING-ASSETS>                            0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>            89,116
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                 34,244
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                  124,953
<LOANS>                               207,584
<ALLOWANCE>                             3,373
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        386,608
<DEPOSITS>                            312,703
<SHORT-TERM>                           15,694
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                     3,972
<LONG-TERM>                             2,966
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<COMMON>                                   29
<OTHER-SE>                             51,244
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>        386,608
<INTEREST-LOAN>                        13,287
<INTEREST-INVEST>                       5,812
<INTEREST-OTHER>                          385
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                       19,484
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                      8,235
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      8,554
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                  10,930
<LOAN-LOSSES>                             369
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                         43
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                        11,365
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         5,404
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>              5,404
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                            3,710
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            1.29 
<EPS-DILUTED>                            1.29
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                           2.66
<LOANS-NON>                                52
<LOANS-PAST>                            3,039
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                            0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                         1,343
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                        3,382
<CHARGE-OFFS>                             483
<RECOVERIES>                              105
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                       3,373
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                    2,451
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                         0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                   922
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7371

JAMES G. ARMISTEAD, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DERRICK WADSWORTH, Superintendent; HYDE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-03-1178) Submitted: December 9, 2004 Decided: December 16, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James G. Armistead, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: James G. Armistead seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to deny his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The report and recommendation of the magistrate judge is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
ORIGINA 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

PR 24-0005 

IN RE MOTION OF ASHLEY C. MELWANI FOR 

ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF THE STATE OF 

MONTANA 

F:Lar-7-3 

JUN 1 1 2024 

Bowen Greenwood 

Clerk of Supreme Court 

State of Montana 

ORDER 

Ashley C. Melwani has moved for admission to the Bar of the State of Montana 

pursuant to Rule V of the Rules for Admission, Admission on Motion. The Bar Admissions 

Administrator of the State Bar of Montana has informed the Court that the Commission on 

Character and Fitness has certified that Melwani has provided the necessary documentation 

and has satisfied the requirements prerequisite to admission on motion under Rule V. 

Therefore, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that upon payment of any application fees and 

completion of any other processing requirements as set forth by the Bar Admissions 

Administrator, Ashley C. Melwani may be sworn in to the practice of law in the State of 

Montana. Arrangements for swearing in may be made by contacting the office of the Clerk 

of the Montana Supreme Court. 

The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this order to Petitioner and to the State 

Bar of Montana. Lt"..., 

DATED this day of June, 2024. 

Chief Justice 

06/11/2024

Case Number: PR 24-0005
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T I n th e M a tt e ro f: D EN N I S LA BA RRE PI KE; KA THRYN LORET TA PI KE, D eb t o rs, DE NN I S L AB AR R E P I KE ; KA T HR YN LORE TT A PI KE, P l ai n t i ffs/ A p p el l an t s, v. J A M E S J . J O S E P H , a s trus t e e f orthe es t at e of D enni s & K athryn P i ke, D e f

e n d a n t/ A pp el l ee . N o. 09- 56266 D. C . No . 8 : 0 7 - c v - 0 1 1 8 5 - DO C ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia D a vi d O . C a r t e r , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d N ove m be r4, 2010

P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia 

# FI LED MA R 03 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALST he H on orabl e R ob ertC l i ve Jones, U . S . D i stri ctJudg e f or the D i stri ct ** of N e va da , s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on. 2 B ef ore: R A W L IN S O N and M . S M IT H , C i rc ui tJudg es , and JO N E S , D i stri ct Judg e. ** A pp el l ant s D enni s a nd K athryn P i ke appeal the di stri ctcourt ’ s order af fi rm i ng the bank rupt cycourt ’ s di sm i ss al of thei r a ct i on se eki ng a dec l ar at ory j udgm e nt . T he di s tr i c tc our tpr ope r l y a f f i r m e d the ba nkrupt c y c our t ’ s di s m i s s a l of A ppe l l a nt s ’ a c t i on s e e ki ng de c l a r a t ory r e l i e f be c a us e the i rc l a i m w a s ba rr e d by is s u e p r e c lu s io n . See A lon so v. Su m m ervi l l e (In re Su m m ervi l l e) , 361 B . R . 133, 14 3-44 (9th C i r. B . A . P . 20 07 ) ( desc ri bi ng i ss ue precl usi on ). In the decl ar at ory r e l i e f a c t i on, A ppe l l a nt s s oughta de t e r m i na t i on tha tD e nni s P i ke ’ s pos t - pe t i t i on c ontr i but i on of

w a ge s t o s a t i s f

y trus tde e ds on the i rr e s i de nc e a nd pos t - pe t i t i on w ork p er form ed by D enni s P i ke ent i t l ed A pp el l ant s t o an equ i ty i nt er es ti n the re al p r o p e r ty . H ow ever , ea rl i eri n the bank rupt cyproceedi ng s, A pp el l ant s broug htan u n s u c c e s s f

u l m o tio n f

o ra llo w a n c e o f

a n a d m in is tr a tiv e c la im p r e d ic a te d o n e x a c tly the s a m e f

a c t s . I s s ue pr e c l us i on ba rr e d the de c l a r a t ory r e l i e f a c t i on be c a us e the i de nt i c a l i s s ue , ba s e d on the s a m e f a c t s , w a s de c i de d i n r e s ol vi ng the a d m in is tr a tiv e c la im . See Fr ank f or t D i gi tal Servs. L td. v. Kist l er (In reB e c a us e w e a f f i r m the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s j udgm e nton the ba s i s of i s s ue 1 p recl u si o n , th ere i s n o n eed t o ad d ress th e o th er i ssu es rai sed b y th e p art i es. 3 R eyn o so ), 47 7 F . 3d 11 17 , 11 22 (9th C i r. 20 07 ) ( ho l di ng thati ss ue precl usi on bars re l i t i gat i on of i ss ues thathave been adj ud i ca t ed i n an earl i erproceedi ng ).

AF F I RME D. 1
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

ERASMO VILLA-SOSA,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 15-50194

D.C. No. 3:15-cr-00529-LAB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 25, 2015**

Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Erasmo Villa-Sosa appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges 

the 12-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being a 

removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We 

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

SEP 1 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 15-50194

Villa-Sosa contends that the district court erred by failing to address the 

alleged sentencing disparity created by its determination that a two-level, rather 

than a four-level, fast-track departure was warranted under U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1. We 

review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 

1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and find none. The district court sufficiently explained the 

sentence; it was not required to “tick off” each of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) 

sentencing factors. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) 

(en banc). Moreover, Villa-Sosa’s sentence is substantively reasonable in light 

of the section 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, 

including Villa-Sosa’s immigration history. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 

38, 51 (2007). 

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         156,529
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,156,300
<ALLOWANCES>                                    45,000
<INVENTORY>                                  5,241,968
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,635,504
<PP&E>                                       5,302,359
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,760,008
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             108,239,177
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       72,771,805
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       230,583
<OTHER-SE>                                  28,362,054
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               108,239,177
<SALES>                                      8,367,213
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,037,622
<CGS>                                        5,865,699
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               484,781
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                32,791
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,316,989
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 70,482
<INCOME-TAX>                                   216,998
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            482,996
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   482,996
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR 

### THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

## OCT 2 

# 5 2010 'Ierk- 

### U-s.District& Bankruptcy Cour' for the Districtof

### Columbia Gene Nelson Goodman, ) ) Plaintiff, 

## 1 ) Civil Action No. 

## 1 ) Chairman, State Board of Pardons ) & Paroles et al., 

## 1 Defendants. 

## 1
MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on review ofplaintiffspro se complaint and application to proceed informapauperis. The application will be granted and the case will be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

### $ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(ii). Under that statute, the Court is required to dismiss
a case "at any time" it determines that the complaint, among other grounds, failsto state a claim upon which relief can be granted or is frivolous. Plaintiff is a resident of Waycross, Georgia, who appears also to be a state parolee. He
sues various Georgia-based officials, including the Chairman ofthe State Board of Pardons and Paroles, the Clerk ofthe Georgia Supreme Court, the Chief Judge of the Superior Court of Ware County, Georgia, the Ware County District Attorney and the Ware County Sheriff under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations 

### ("RICO) Act, 18U.S.C. §§ 1961 et seq. In addition, plaintiff sues Congressman John Lewis for "refusing to conduct a congressional [investigation] into the misconduct of [the] defendants." Compl. at 2. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief and 

### $5 million in monetary damages. Id. at 18-19.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2299 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2299

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of 
 State, Administration of Foreign Affairs, Capital Investment Fund for 
                           fiscal year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of 
 State, Administration of Foreign Affairs, Capital Investment Fund for 
                           fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR DEPARTMENT OF STATE, 
              ADMINISTRATION OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, CAPITAL INVESTMENT 
              FUND FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for Department of State, 
Administration of Foreign Affairs, Capital Investment Fund for fiscal 
year 2024 may not exceed $92,770,000.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 11 (Friday, January 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 2436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00338]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-5828-N-03]


Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the Homeless

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and 
Development, HUD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and 
surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible 
use to assist the homeless.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juanita Perry, Department of Housing 
and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., Room 7262, Washington, 
DC 20410; telephone (202) 402-3970; TTY number for the hearing- and 
speech-impaired (202) 708-2565, (these telephone numbers are not toll-
free), or call the toll-free Title V information line at 800-927-7588.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the December 12, 1988 
court order in National Coalition for the Homeless v. Veterans 
Administration, No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.), HUD publishes a Notice, on a 
weekly basis, identifying unutilized, underutilized, excess and surplus 
Federal buildings and real property that HUD has reviewed for 
suitability for use to assist the homeless. Today's Notice is for the 
purpose of announcing that no additional properties have been 
determined suitable or unsuitable this week.

    Dated: January 8, 2015.
Brian P. Fitzmaurice,
Director, Division of Community Assistance, Office of Special Needs 
Assistance Programs.
[FR Doc. 2015-00338 Filed 1-15-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
|Exhibit 32
|----------



|ASPEN EXPLORATION CORPORATIONCertification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 of theChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the Report) of Aspen Exploration Corporation (the Company) for the quarter ended December 31, 2008, each of the undersigned R.V. Bailey, the Chief Executive Officer and principal executive officer of the Company, and Kevan Hensman, the Chief Financial Officer and the principal financial officer of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of the undersigneds knowledge and belief:

1.      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                  |  |                                       
|----------------- |  | --------------------------------------
|February 17, 2009 |  | /s/ R.V. Bailey                       
|                  |  | R.V. Bailey, Chief Executive Officer  
|                 
|February 17, 2009 |  | /s/ Kevan Hensman                     
|                  |  | Kevan Hensman, Chief Financial Officer

---
SCWC

- 18

- 0000301

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI  I

________________________________________________________________

In re Sanction s Against EARLE A. PARTINGTON and

ROBERT PATRICK MCPHERSON

, Petitioners

, in

STATE OF HAWAI  I, Respondent/Plaintiff

- Appellee,

vs.

MAGGIE KWONG , Respondent/ Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________________________________________________

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP

- 18

- 0000301; CASE NO. 1DTA

- 1 7

- 02539 )

ORDER ACCEPTIN G APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)

Petitioner s Earle A. Partington and Robert Patrick

McPherson ’s application for writ of certiorari filed on March 6,

2019 , is hereby accepted

.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that no oral argument will be heard

in this case. Any party may, within ten days and pursuant to

Rule 34(c) of the Hawai  i Rules of Appellate Procedure, move for

retention of oral argument.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai  i, April 15 , 2019

.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

/s/ Mich ael D. Wilson Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-18-0000301

15-APR-2019

10:16 AM
#### Veronica HERNANDEZ-RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-72563.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*129Submitted Oct. 11, 2006.*

Filed Oct. 17, 2006.

Rosario Maria Hernandez, Esq., San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: TASHIMA, W. FLETCHER and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Respondent’s motion for summary disposition is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. *See United, States v. Hooton,*693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). Petitioner has no qualifying relative for purposes of cancellation of removal. 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(D). Petitioner submitted no application for asylum and has at no time in the proceedings before the agency or in filings in this court made any showing of eligibility for that relief. Accordingly, this petition for review is denied.

All other pending motions are denied as moot. The temporary stay of removal and voluntary departure confirmed by Ninth Circuit General Order 6.4(c) and *Desta v. Ashcroft,*365 F.3d 741 (9th Cir.2004), shall continue in effect until issuance of the mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-65,741]

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on April 3, 2009 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of 3M Company, Columbia, Missouri.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 13th day of April 2009.

Linda G. Poole,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-10893 Filed 5-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P