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

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 9
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          71,780
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          11,356
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                63,900
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     74,523
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         172,234
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           176,133
<LOANS>                                        912,790
<ALLOWANCE>                                    (9,850)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,398,068
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,234,452
<SHORT-TERM>                                    16,379
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             10,608
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           28,750
<PREFERRED>                                        163
<COMMON>                                        23,630
<OTHER-SE>                                     164,848
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,398,068
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 61,838
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               12,217
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 2,767
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                76,822
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              21,965
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              22,647
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           54,175
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   22,647
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 44,479
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 19,639
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      19,639
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    13,249
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.57
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.54
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    6.00
<LOANS-NON>                                      4,926
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,219
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   309
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 20,687
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 7,882
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    2,548
<RECOVERIES>                                       418
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                9,850
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             5,474
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          4,376
        

</TABLE>
|   | (a)                                                  |   | the      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended      September 30, 2009 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and      Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;      and |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                 |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
|   | (b)                                                  |   | the      information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of      the Company.                                                                                                                                                 |
|   |                                                 |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |   |
|   |                                                 |   |
|   | /s/ Garrett E.      Pierce                           |   |
|   | Garrett      E. Pierce                          |   |
|   | Vice      Chairman and Chief Financial Officer  |   |
|   | October      29, 2009                           |   |
|   |
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, January 10, 2018. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, January 10, 2018 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A18D0246. WAYNE D. REID, II v. GINGER B. REID.
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 1118115
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2140

RICHARD MARTIN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF POLICE; CORPORAL FRANK CORN; 

POLICE OFFICER MATT LYNCH; POLICE OFFICER HEATH BERRY; 

POLICE OFFICER LUCAS BALTZ,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. George Jarrod Hazel, District Judge. 

(8:15-cv-02431-GJH)

Submitted: December 15, 2015 Decided: December 17, 2015

Before GREGORY and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Richard Martin, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Richard Martin appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his civil action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) 

(2012). For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

On appeal, Martin challenges the district court’s 

conclusion that his claims were untimely. Martin’s claims, 

whether brought under state law or 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012), were 

subject to, at longest, a three-year statute of limitations. 

See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (2013) (general 

civil statute of limitations); Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. 

§ 5-105 (2013) (actions for assault and defamation); Owens v. 

Balt. City State’s Attorneys Office, 767 F.3d 379, 388 (4th Cir. 

2014) (§ 1983 claims), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 1893 (2015). 

While Martin’s malicious prosecution claim has not yet accrued, 

this claim is barred by his inability to meet the favorable 

termination requirement. See Heron v. Strader, 761 A.2d 56, 59 

(Md. 2000). Contrary to Martin’s assertions, the facts alleged 

in the complaint demonstrate that his remaining claims accrued, 

at the latest, by the time he was released from prison, and the 

limitations period was not subject to tolling. See A Soc’y 

Without a Name v. Virginia, 655 F.3d 342, 348 (4th Cir. 2011) 

(accrual under § 1983); Shailendra Kumar, P.A. v. Dhanda, 43 

A.3d 1029, 1034-34, 1039-41 (Md. 2012) (discussing accrual and 

tolling under state law); see also Nat’l Advert. Co. v. Raleigh, 
3

947 F.2d 1158, 1166-67 (4th Cir. 1991) (describing continuing 

violations doctrine). Finally, because Martin’s claims were 

properly dismissed, the district court committed no error in 

denying as moot Martin’s request to file electronically.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We 

deny Martin’s motions to seal and to compel. 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.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 21.1





LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF PERMA-FIX ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.


(THE “COMPANY”)





Industrial Waste Management Services





Perma-Fix of Fort Lauderdale, Inc. (“PFFL”), a Florida corporation, is a 100% owned subsidiary of the Company.





Perma-Fix of Memphis, Inc. (“PFM”), a Tennessee corporation, is a 100% owned subsidiary of the Company.





Perma-Fix of Orlando, Inc. (“PFO”), a Florida Corporation, is a 100% owned subsidiary of the Company.





Perma-Fix of South Georgia, Inc. (“PFSG”), a Georgia Corporation, is a 100% owned subsidiary of the Company.





Perma-Fix of Michigan, Inc., (“PFMI”) a Michigan Corporation, is a 100% owned subsidiary of the Company.





Perma-Fix of Pittsburgh, Inc., (“PFP”) a Pennsylvania Corporation, is a 100% owned subsidiary of the Company.





Nuclear Waste Management Services





Perma-Fix of Florida, Inc. (“PFF”), a Florida Corporation, is a 100% owned subsidiary of the Company.





Diversified Scientific Services, Inc., (“DSSI”) a Tennessee Corporation, is a 100% owned subsidiary of the Company.





East Tennessee Materials and Energy Corporation, (“M&EC”) a Tennessee Corporation, is a 100% owned subsidiary of the Company.





Perma-Fix of Northwest Richland, Inc. (“PFNWR”), a Washington Corporation, is a 100% subsidiary of the Company.





Consulting Services





Schreiber, Yonley & Associates (“SYA”), a Missouri corporation, is a 100% owned subsidiary of the Company.
#### Tai Ping Chen, Appellant, v Citibank et al., Respondents.

Submitted August 31, 2009;

decided October 20, 2009

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution. Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
#### McNealy *v.*The State.

The indictment being founded on §4578 of the code, and charging the running of a “freight-train” on the Sabbath day, and the evidence showing that the train run consisted only of a locomotive and cab, and it not appearing that any freight was carried, offered to be carried or invited for carriage, the indictment was not supported by the evidence; a locomotive and cab, when not run for carrying freight nor intended to be presently used for such carriage, not being a freight-train. The court erred in charging the jury that *“*if that was a freight-engine and had a car attached that usually went with a freight-train and that the purpose of it was to facilitate the carrying of freight, it was a freight-train.”

June 4, 1894.

*Judgment reversed.*

*593Indictment for misdemeanor. Before Judge Richard H. Clark. Clayton superior court. March term, 1894.

Hall & Boynton and Watterson & Kimsey, for plaintiff in error. J. S. Candler, solicitor-general, *contra.*
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 13 (Thursday, January 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 4051]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1185]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[ES-956-1420-BJ-TRST; Group No. 193, Minnesota]


Eastern States: Filing of Plat of Survey

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of filing of plat of survey; Minnesota.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will file the plat of 
survey of the lands described below in the BLM-Eastern States, 
Springfield, Virginia, 30 calendar days from the date of publication in 
the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bureau of Land Management, 7450 Boston 
Boulevard, Springfield, Virginia 22153. Attn: Cadastral Survey.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This survey was requested by the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs.
    The lands we surveyed are:

Fourth Principal Meridian, Minnesota

T. 43 North, R. 27 West

    The plat of survey represents the dependent resurvey of a portion 
of the south boundary, a portion of the subdivisional lines, the 
subdivision of section 33, and the reestablishment of the record 
meander lines in section 33, in Township 43 North, Range 27 West, of 
the Fourth Principal Meridian, in the State of Minnesota, and was 
accepted January 9, 2009. We will place a copy of the plat we described 
in the open files. It will be available to the public as a matter of 
information.
    If BLM receives a protest against this survey, as shown on the 
plat, prior to the date of the official filing, we will stay the filing 
pending our consideration of the protest.
    We will not officially file the plat until the day after we have 
accepted or dismissed all protests and they have become final, 
including decisions on appeals.

    Dated: January 12, 2009.
Dominica Van Koten,
Chief Cadastral Surveyor.
[FR Doc. E9-1185 Filed 1-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-GJ-P
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-13-00453-CV

J. B., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 146TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 257,265-B, HONORABLE JACK WELDON JONES, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

J.B. filed this accelerated appeal from the district court’s decree terminating her

parental rights to her minor children, J.R.N. and L.C.N., terminating the parental rights of J.R.N.’s

father, M.N.N., and L.C.N.’s father, C.R.N., and appointing the Texas Department of Family and

Protective Services as J.R.N. and L.C.N.’s managing conservator.

J.B.’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous

and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)

by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable

grounds to be advanced on appeal. See 386 U.S. at 744; see also Taylor v. Texas Dep’t of Protective

& Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641, 646-47 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005, pet. denied) (applying

Anders procedure in appeal from termination of parental rights). Counsel certified to this Court that
he provided J.B. with a copy of the Anders brief and notice of her right to examine the appellate

record and file a pro se brief. J.B. did not file a pro se brief.

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous

and without merit. Finding nothing in the record that might arguably support an appeal, we grant

counsel’s first amended motion to withdraw and affirm the order of termination.

 

Jeff Rose, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Rose and Goodwin

Affirmed

Filed: September 27, 2013

2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

EASTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

TYREEK DENMARK, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 157 EAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 22nd day of August, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

is DENIED. 

Justice Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 905 

For the relief of Heilit Martinez. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 26, 2005 

Mr. HATCH introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

For the relief of Heilit Martinez.

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR HEILIT 

4 MARTINEZ. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) 

6 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality 

7 Act (8 U.S.C. 1151), Heilit Martinez shall be eligible for 

8 issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status 

9 to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent resi10 dence upon filing an application for issuance of an immi11 grant visa under section 204 of that Act or for adjustment 

12 of status to lawful permanent resident. 
2

•S 905 IS

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Heilit Martinez 

2 enters the United States before the filing deadline speci3 fied in subsection (c), Heilit Martinez shall be considered 

4 to have entered and remained lawfully and shall be eligible 

5 for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Immi6 gration and Nationality Act as of the date of enactment 

7 of this Act. 

8 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

9 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap10 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica11 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees 

12 within 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act. 

13 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS.—

14 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res15 idence to Heilit Martinez, the Secretary of State shall in16 struct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the current 

17 or next following fiscal year, the total number of immi18 grant visas that are made available to natives of the coun19 try of birth of Heilit Martinez under section 203(a) of the 

20 Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the 

21 total number of immigrant visas that are made available 

22 to natives of the country of birth of Heilit Martinez under 

23 section 202(e) of that Act.

Æ
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Carlos Reyes, Respondent.

Submitted August 2, 2010;

decided August 26, 2010

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Richard M. Greenberg, Esq., Office of the Appellate Defender, 11 Park Place, Suite 1601, New York, NY 10007 assigned as counsel to the respondent on the appeal herein.
Exhibit 99.1

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                       OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Gexa Corp. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2002 (the "Report"), as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Neil Leibman,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

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

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


Neil Leibman
Chief Executive Officer
Dated: November 14, 2002
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-13-00453- CV
J. B., App ellant
v. Texas Depart m ent of Fam ily and P rote ctive Service s, Appellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F B ELL COUNTY , 146 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. 257 ,265 -B , H ONO RAB LE JACK WELDO N JO NES, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
J .B. filed this acc eler ated appea l from the d i s t ri ct court’s decr ee terminating her pare ntal rig hts to her minor children, J .R.N. and L .C.N., terminating the pare ntal rig hts of J .R.N.’s fathe r, M.N.N., and L .C.N.’s fathe r, C .R.N., and appointing t he Tex as Department o f Fa m i l y and Protective Servic es as J.R.N. and L .C.N.’s manag ing c onserva tor. J .B.’ s court-a

ppointed attorney filed a b rief concluding that the appea l is frivolous and without mer it. The brief meets the require ments of Anders v. Calif ornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967) by prese nting a profe ssional e valuation of the rec ord and demonstrating why there are no arg uable g rounds to be advanc ed on appea l. See 386 U.S. at 744; see also Taylor v. Texas Dep’ t of Protective & Regulatory Servs ., 160 S.W .3d 641, 646-47 (Tex. App.—Austin 200 5 , p et
. denied) (applying Anders proce dure in appea l from termination of pare ntal rig hts). Counsel cer tified to this Court thath e p ro v ided J .B. with a copy of the Anders brief and notice of her rig ht to examine the ap p el l at e

rec ord and f

ile a pro se brief. J.B. did not file a pr o se brief
. We have revie wed the rec o r d a n d counsel’s brief and ag ree that the appea l is frivolous and without merit. Finding nothing in the record that might arg uably support an appeal, we g rant counsel’s f

irst amended motion to withdraw a nd aff irm the order

of termination.

J eff Rose, J ustice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Rose and Goodwin Affir med Filed: September

27, 2013

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           1,673
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,277
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    100,578
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               128,287
<PP&E>                                          69,370
<DEPRECIATION>                                (29,824)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 232,863
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          126,613
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        62,789
<OTHER-SE>                                      38,461
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   232,863
<SALES>                                         42,057
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                63,801
<CGS>                                           17,126
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  200,955
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (137,154)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (137,154)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference inRegistration Statements Nos. 333-46345 and 333-86487 of Sterling Bancshares, Inc. on Forms S-4 and in Registration Statements Nos. 33-75444, 33-75442, 33-84398, 33-85624, 333-16719, 333-57171, 333-102544, 333-105307 and 333-116132 of SterlingBancshares, Inc. on Forms S-8 of our reports dated February 24, 2006 relating to the consolidated financial statements of Sterling Bancshares, Inc. and management’s report of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reportingappearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Sterling Bancshares, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2005. 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Houston, Texas 

March 2, 2006