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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE HANOVER
DIRECT, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND
STATEMENTS OF INCOME FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 23, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-23-2000
<CASH>                                           1,517
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   30,760
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,827)
<INVENTORY>                                     74,131
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               136,549
<PP&E>                                         102,946
<DEPRECIATION>                                (52,308)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 216,609
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           93,522
<BONDS>                                         35,839
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           69,255
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       142,951
<OTHER-SE>                                   (127,400)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   216,609
<SALES>                                        413,937
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               413,937
<CGS>                                          167,236
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  441,174
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,871
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,686
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,690
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (41,798)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       135
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (41,933)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (41,933)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.20)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 4.1

               Incorporated under the Laws of the State of Nevada

Certificate No.                                                 Shares
    A XX                                                      - XXX,XXX -
   -------                                                   -------------


                      SEE RESTRICTIVE LEGEND ON THE REVERSE
                          SECURECARE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
                 TOTAL AUTHORIZED SHARE ISSUE 65,000,000 SHARES
                 50,000,000 SHARES PAR VALUE $.001 COMMON STOCK
                15,000,000 SHARES PAR VALUE $.001 PREFERRED STOCK
                                  CONSISTING OF
          12,000,000 SHARES PAR VALUE $.001 BLANK CHECK PREFERRED STOCK
            3,000,000 SHARES PAR VALUE $.001 SERIES A PREFERRED STOCK


                  This is to Certify that - XXXX Xxxx - is the
                                          -------------
                                    owner of

                        - XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX (XXX,XXX) -
                        --------------------------------
                  Fully paid and non- assessable shares of the
           Series A Preferred Stock of SecureCARE Technologies, Inc.

transferable on the books of the Corporation by the holder in person or by duly
authorized Attorney upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed.

         Witness, the signatures of its duly authorized officers.

Dated:


Secretary                                             President
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Earnest McARN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-7062.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 31, 2006.

Decided: Nov. 6, 2006.

Earnest McArn, Appellant Pro Se. William Earl Day, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

*226Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 86(c).

PER CURIAM:

Earnest McArn seeks to appeal from the district court’s order construing his motion for reduction of his sentence as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and denying relief because it was a successive § 2255 motion for which authorization had not been obtained. We find that the district court properly construed the motion as one under § 2255. *See Raines v. United States,*423 F.2d 526, 528 & n. 1 (4th Cir.1970); *see also Gonzalez v. Crosby,*545 U.S. 524, 531, 125 S.Ct. 2641, 2647, 162 L.Ed.2d 480 (2005) (where a motion is “in substance a successive habeas petition,” it “should be treated accordingly”).

Because McArn’ s motion was properly construed as a § 2255 motion, the order dismissing the motion is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); *Jones v. Braxton,*392 F.3d 683 (4th Cir.2004). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are likewise debatable. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that McArn has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.*
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 and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a )( 2 ). A cc o rd in g ly, V elas q u ez ’s r e que s tf oror a l a r gum e nti s de ni e d.

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 RODO LF O V EL ASQU EZ , P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. CH A SE H O M E FI N A N CE LLC; FANN I E M AE, D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 11- 17173 D . C. N o . 2 : 1 1 - c v - 0 1 0 1 9 - G EBJ FM 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 E a s te rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia G ar l and E . B urr e l l , J r . , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng

S ubm i tt e d A ugus t8, 2012 ** B e f o r e : A L A R C Ó N , B E R Z O N , an dI K U T A , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . R odol f o V e l a s que z appe a l s pr o s e f r om the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s j udgm e nt di s m i s s i ng hi s a c t i on ar i s i ng outof f or e c l os ur e pr oc e e di ngs a s ba rr e d bythe



# FI LED AU G 15 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 17173 2 do ctri ne of re s j ud i cat a. W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 28 U . S . C . § 1 29 1. W e r evi ew d e n o v o . Stew a rt

v. U . S. B a n co rp , 2 9 7 F. 3 d9 5 3 , 9 5 6 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 2 ) . W e a f f i rm. T he di s tr i c tc ourtpr ope r l ydi s m i s s e d V e l a s que z ’ s a c t i on a s ba rr e d bythe d o ctri n e o f res j u d i cat a b ecau se V el asq u ez rai sed , o r co u l dh av e rai sed , th ese c l a i m s i n hi s pr i ora c t i on tha ti nvol ve d the s a m e de f e nda nt s a nd w a s de c i de d on the m e r its . Se e id. ( r e s j u d i c a t ab ar s l i t i g a t i o n i n as ub s e q u e n ta c t i o n o f “ ‘ an yc l a i ms tha tw e r e r a i s e d orc oul d ha ve be e n r a i s e d’ i n apr i ora c t i on” ( e m pha s i s a nd c i t a t i on om i tt ed)) . V el asq u ez’ s p en d i n g l o an m o d i fi cat i o n ap p l i cat i o n s d o n o tren d er th i s case m o o t b e c au s e th e yd o n o t r e s o lv e th e p artie s ’ d is p u te . Se e L e i gh v . Salaz ar , 677 F . 3d 892, 896 ( 9th C i r . 2012) ( c a s e i s m ooti f e ve nt s s ubs e que ntt o the f i l i ng of the ca se re sol ve the part i es ’ di sput e) . V e la s q u e z ’s r e q u e s ts f

o rju d ic ia l n o tic e a r e d e n ie d . A F F I R M E D .
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                        5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from EQUIVEST
FINANCE, INC. and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                    JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                            1,172,185
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   137,569,315
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (2,893,538)
<INVENTORY>                                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                          0
<PP&E>                                                    0
<DEPRECIATION>                                            0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  142,705,333
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             3,374,082
<BONDS>                                         104,114,442
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                30,000
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                          1,095,286
<OTHER-SE>                                       34,091,523
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    142,705,333
<SALES>                                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 10,278,483
<CGS>                                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  2,341,404
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    450,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                3,371,830
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   4,115,249
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1,440,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               2,675,249
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                      2,675,249
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           .11
        

</TABLE>
##### 



SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO.

EXHIBIT 99(b)


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)

The undersigned, Paul J. Liska, Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of Sears, Roebuck and Co. (the Company), has executed this
certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange
Commission of the Companys Amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the
quarter ended June 29, 2002 (the Report).



| |  | The undersigned hereby certifies that:
| |  | --------------------------------------



| | 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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of
the 2nd day of October, 2002.

|                                                                                      |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ Paul J. Liska

Paul J. Liska
Executive Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer |  |
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3853 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3853

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 39-25 61st Street in Woodside, New York, as the ``Thomas J. Manton 
                        Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 6, 2006

  Mr. Schumer introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 39-25 61st Street in Woodside, New York, as the ``Thomas J. Manton 
                        Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. THOMAS J. MANTON POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 39-25 61st Street in Woodside, New York, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Thomas J. Manton Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Thomas J. 
Manton Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
<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 1-3 OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB FOR THE YEAR-TO-DATE AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         511,007
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,381,562
<ALLOWANCES>                                   308,390
<INVENTORY>                                    900,749
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,603,705
<PP&E>                                       9,711,260
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,849,265
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,540,982
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,762,873
<BONDS>                                      5,000,656
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,089,638
<COMMON>                                       137,978
<OTHER-SE>                                   (581,124)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,540,982
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,628,839
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,364,621
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                52,141
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             366,117
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (83,688)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (83,688)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (83,688)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.06)
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Nathaniel Dove, Jr., Respondent, v Katrice M. Rose, Appellant, et al., Respondent.

Submitted May 10, 2010;

decided June 29, 2010

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from the Appellate Division order that affirmed Family Court’s order settling the record on appeal, dismissed upon the ground that such order does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-26-1997
<CASH>                                              29
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,941
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     49,291
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                86,850
<PP&E>                                           5,167
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 148,602
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           33,245
<BONDS>                                         75,804
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,000
<OTHER-SE>                                      39,544
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   148,602
<SALES>                                        181,231
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                          135,912
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  167,388
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,178
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,294
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,371
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,364
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,007
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.53
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7504

TYRONE WAYNE MOORE, SR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

WAYNE L. EMERY,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior

District Judge. (CA-95-408)

Submitted: February 7, 1996 Decided: February 22, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tyrone Wayne Moore, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his

42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. The district court assessed a

filing fee in accordance with Evans v. Croom, 650 F.2d 521 (4th

Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1153 (1982), and dismissed the

case without prejudice when Appellant failed to comply with the fee

order. Finding no abuse of discretion, we deny leave to proceed in

forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. 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
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-40861 USDC No. CR-C-89-125-1

__________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus CHARLES DANIEL DEARING, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

- - - - - - - - - - January 31, 1996 Before JOLLY, JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Charles Dearing, Jr., requests leave to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP) the district court's denial of his motion to emigrate upon release from custody. Because Dearing's appeal fails to present a nonfrivolous issue, his motion for IFP is DENIED. See Jackson v. Dallas Police Dep't , 811 F.2d 260, 261 (5th Cir. 1986). The appeal is DISMISSED.
Overview

A resilient global, service-centric mesh computing capability with access to NGA data 

holdings, CORE development services, and hybrid-cloud resources. This micro-services 

architecture consolidates multiple standalone edge implementations to an integrated 

edge environment that operates like a Content Delivery Network (CDN) designed for the 

requirements of the Geospatial mission.

How does JREN meet 

DOD and NGA’s strategic technology goals?

► Provides the data, platform and hosting 

capability for NGA ASP’s, NGA/DOD 

developers, rapid COTS integration, and API’s 

for NSG/ASG.

► Provides an innovative mesh network 

capability delivering data and services 

across resilient global nodes.

► JREN is NGA’s service centric architecture 

built from the ground up to meet future 

ground architecture goals. 

► Services and data are strategically 

positioned across the globe to directly 

support the warfighter in connected and 

disconnected environments at an increased 

delivery speed. 

ASP Benefits

Built on NGA’s state-of-the-art 

NGA Platform as a Service offering 

allowing application providers 

to deploy containerized code 

with access to a full suite of 

development tools, data caching 

services, and enterprise services.

Analyst Benefits

A seamless experience for 

analysts by translating legacy data 

application services to analysts’ 

tools-of-choice so that the only 

changes experienced are increased 

availability and speed of data.

Mission Owner 

Benefits

Global data and operational 

resiliency through an advanced 

set of content delivery and mesh 

network functionality. Critical 

mission capabilities are maintained 

in connected or disconnected 

environments with direct sensor 

downlink and intelligent global data 

caching.

Approved for public release, NGA-U-2022-02311

What is 

JREN?

The next generation 

of edge technology 

that provides the data 

and infrastructure 

foundation to support 

Sensor to Effect 

and future ground 

architecture with 

multiple cloud-like 

layers which are 

integrated into the 

NGA enterprise to 

enable seamless 

operations of NGA in 

both a connected and 

disconnected state.

NGA JOINT REGIONAL 

EDGE NODE (JREN)

Scalable Hybrid Cloud 

Architecture

Virtualization/ 

Containerized/API’s

MLOps and AI Platform

Global Data Resiliency

Integrated Dev and 

Production 

Autonomy, Automation, & 

Integrity