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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                                          12,927
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  546,791
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     48,311
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               635,684
<PP&E>                                       1,054,385
<DEPRECIATION>                               (306,651)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,438,414
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          610,862
<BONDS>                                        358,700
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        416
<COMMON>                                         3,265
<OTHER-SE>                                     387,853
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,431,422
<SALES>                                      3,215,345
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,281,988
<CGS>                                        2,985,501
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,108,631
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                48,513
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,460
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 91,384
<INCOME-TAX>                                    33,562
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             57,822
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,714)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    56,108
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.41)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.39)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1




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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Point.360 ( the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Haig S. Bagerdjian, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:

      (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.




/s/  Haig S. Bagerdjian
--------------------------
Haig  S. Bagerdjian
Chief Executive Officer
November 12, 2004
H. R. 2767 

One Hundred Twelfth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twelve 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 8 West 

Silver Street in Westfield, Massachusetts, as the ‘‘William T. Trant Post Office 

Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. WILLIAM T. TRANT POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 8 West Silver Street in Westfield, Massachusetts, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘William T. Trant 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 ‘‘William T. Trant Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2660 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 122 North Holderrieth Boulevard in Tomball, 

Texas, as the ‘‘Tomball Veterans Post Office’’. 

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

•HR 2660 EH

1 SECTION 1. TOMBALL VETERANS POST OFFICE. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 122 North Holderrieth Boule4 vard in Tomball, Texas, shall be known and designated 

5 as the ‘‘Tomball Veterans Post Office’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Tomball Veterans 

10 Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 16, 

2011. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2660 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Posterans Post Office’’. levard in Tomball, Texas, as the ‘‘Tomball Vet- al Service located at 122 North Holderrieth Bou-
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 40709 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JORGE ALBERTO PEREZ

- PINA, also known as Jose Luis Pacheco

- Pina, also known as Jorge Perez

- Pina, also known as Jorge Perez , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:10

- CR

- 177

- 1

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jorge Alberto Perez

Pina has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Perez

- Pina has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein , as well

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 2 1 , 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-40709 Document: 00513013971 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/21/2015No. 14

- 40709

as Perez

- Pina’s response . We concu r with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 14-40709 Document: 00513013971 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/21/2015
# FILED January 26, 1998 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSO N OCTOBER 19 97 SES SION

E. L. (ELDRED) REID, ) ) C.C.A. NO. 02C01-9610-CC-00327 Appellan t, ) ) LAKE COUNTY VS. ) ) HO N. JO E G. R ILEY , JR., GOV. DON SUNDQUIST, ) JUDGE COMM. DONAL[D] CAMPBELL, ) and WARDEN FRED RANEY , ) ) Appellees. ) (Habeas corpus)
FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE: E. L. (ELDRE D) REID, pro se JOHN KNOX WALKUP # 20334 3 NWCC Attorney General & Reporter Rt. 1, Box 660 Tiptonville , TN 38079 KENNETH W. RUCKER Asst. Attorney

General 450 Jam es R obe rtson Pkw y. Nashville, TN 37243-4351 C. PHIL LIP BIV ENS District Att

orney General P.O. Drawe r E Dyersburg, TN 38024

OPINION FILED:____________________
AFFIRMED JOHN H. PEAY, Judge2 

### O P I N I O N

The peti tio ner f ile d his peti tio n for writ of ha beascorp

us on Jul y 9, 1996. He is currently

incar cerat ed on a ni

ne yea r sent ence for rape. Th e cour t below su mmarily dismissed

the pet ition. We affirm. Prior t o filing thi s petiti on, the petit ioner pursued a direct appeal of his convic

tion in t his Cour t, where it was a ffirme d. See State v. Eldred R eid , No. 01C01-9511-CC-00390, Rutherford County (Tenn. Crim. App. fil

ed June 6, 1997, at Nashville). His Rule 1 1 application fro m that dec ision to our S upreme C ourt is cur rently p ending. Petit ions for habeas corpus

and/or post-convi

ction reli ef cannot be maintained while a di

rect appeal

is pend ing. See Hankin s v. State , 512 S.W.2d 591, 592 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1974). Accordingly, the judgment below is a ffirmed.

_____ ____________________________ _ JOHN H. PEAY , Judge
CONCUR:

_______________________________ PAUL G. SUM MERS, Judge

_______________________________ DAVID G. HA YES, Judge
NO. 07-07-0379-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

OCTOBER 1, 2007

______________________________

MARCUS MOONEY DUNN,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 242nd DISTRICT COURT OF HALE COUNTY;

NO. B16635-0602; HON. ED SELF, PRESIDING

_______________________________

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

__________________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Appellant Marcus Mooney Dunn, by and through his attorney, has filed a motion to

dismiss his appeal because he no longer desires to prosecute it. Without passing on the

merits of the case, we grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate

Procedure 42.2(a) and dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s

request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

Brian Quinn

 Chief Justice

Do not publish.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Miscellaneous Docket No. 896 IN RE LAWRENCE V. WILDER, SR.,

Petitioner. On Writ of Mandamus from the Merit Systems Protection Board in case nos. PH844E080524-I-1 and PH1221080452-W-1. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS Before MAYER, SCHALL, and MOORE Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. ORDER Lawrence V. Wilder, Sr. petitions for a writ of mandamus directing the Merit Systems Protection Board to appoint counsel, and "notify of rights to appeal discrimination claims to the EEOC." Wilder further requests that the court remand to the Board various Board cases. A party who seeks a writ of mandamus bears the burden of proving that it has no other means of attaining the relief desired, Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Court for S. Dist. of Iowa 490 U.S. 296, 309 (1989), and that the right to issuance of the writ is "clear and indisputable." Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980). The Board cases which Wilder requests the court remand are not currently before this court. Therefore, even if a mandamus petition were the correct method for seeking such relief, which it is not, the court cannot remand. With respect to Wilder's request for counsel, Wilder cites the Board's decision in French v. Office of Pers. Mqmt., 37 M.S.P.R. 496 (1988). In French based on this court's decision in French v. Office of Pers. Mqmt., 810 F.2d 1118 (1987), the Boarddetermined that in certain cases involving mentally incompetent litigants, it was

appropriate for the Board to request pro bono representation for an appellant. The Board further noted, however, that it lacked authority to appoint counsel. See French 37 M.S.P.R. at 498 ("Neither the Board nor OPM has authority to appoint a paid conservator or counsel for Mr. French"). In the Board decision at issue in this petition, the administrative judge (AJ) cited French and provided Wilder with a list of attorneys and organizations to consult concerning the possibility of obtaining legal assistance. The AJ further dismissed Wilder's appeal without prejudice until such time as Wilder becomes competent or obtains representation. Wilder has not shown that either this court's decision or the Board's decision in French requires more than this. Thus, Wilder has not shown that the AJ clearly and indisputably erred. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The petition for a writ of mandamus is denied. FOR THE COURT 

# APR 3 2009 /s/ Jan Horbalv Date Jan Horbaly Clerk 

### ultRaN

# atattirs"

cc: Lawrence V. Wilder, Sr. William P. Rayel, Esq. s17 APR 03 2009 JAN HORB$LY CLERK

Misc. 896 2
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2660 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2660

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 122 North Holderrieth Boulevard in Tomball, Texas, as the ``Tomball 
                        Veterans Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 26, 2011

Mr. McCaul (for himself, Mr. Gohmert, Mr. Poe of Texas, Mr. Sam Johnson 
of Texas, Mr. Hensarling, Mr. Barton of Texas, Mr. Culberson, Mr. Brady 
    of Texas, Mr. Al Green of Texas, Mr. Conaway, Ms. Granger, Mr. 
    Thornberry, Mr. Paul, Mr. Reyes, Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas, Mr. 
 Gonzalez, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr. Olson, Mr. Doggett, Mr. Farenthold, 
Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas, Mr. Carter, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Hall, 
  Mr. Hinojosa, Mr. Flores, Mr. Burgess, Mr. Gene Green of Texas, Mr. 
Canseco, Mr. Cuellar, Mr. Neugebauer, and Mr. Marchant) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and 
                           Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 122 North Holderrieth Boulevard in Tomball, Texas, as the ``Tomball 
                        Veterans Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. TOMBALL VETERANS POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 122 North Holderrieth Boulevard in Tomball, Texas, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Tomball Veterans Post Office''.
    (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 ``Tomball 
Veterans Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2543 

To direct the Federal Trade Commission to prescribe rules prohibiting 

deceptive advertising of abortion services. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 14, 2011 

Mrs. MALONEY (for herself, Ms. MOORE, Ms. NORTON, Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia, Mr. CONYERS, Ms. HIRONO, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. JACKSON of Illinois, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. TOWNS, Mrs. LOWEY, Ms. LEE of California, and 

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To direct the Federal Trade Commission to prescribe rules 

prohibiting deceptive advertising of abortion services. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Stop Deceptive Adver5 tising for Women’s Services Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF DECEPTIVE ADVERTISING OF 

7 ABORTION SERVICES. 

8 (a) CONDUCT PROHIBITED.—Not later than 180 

9 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Federal 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2543 IH

1 Trade Commission shall promulgate rules to prohibit, as 

2 an unfair and deceptive act or practice, any person from 

3 advertising with the intent to deceptively create the im4 pression that— 

5 (1) such person is a provider of abortion serv6 ices if such person does not provide abortion serv7 ices; and 

8 (2) such person is not a provider of abortion 

9 services if such person does provide abortion serv10 ices. 

11 (b) ENFORCEMENT.—The Federal Trade Commis12 sion shall enforce the rules required under subsection (a) 

13 as if a violation of such rules were a violation of section 

14 5(a)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 

15 45(a)(1)). The Commission shall enforce such rules in the 

16 same manner and by the same means, powers, and duties 

17 as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Fed18 eral Trade Commission Act were incorporated into and 

19 made a part of this Act. 

20 SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

21 For purposes of the rules prescribed under section 

22 2, the following definitions apply: 

23 (1) ADVERTISE.—The term ‘‘advertise’’ means 

24 offering of goods or services to the public, regardless 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2543 IH

1 of whether such goods or services are offered for 

2 payment or result in a profit. 

3 (2) ABORTION SERVICES.—The term ‘‘abortion 

4 services’’ means providing surgical and non-surgical 

5 procedures to terminate a pregnancy, or providing 

6 referrals for such procedures. 

7 (3) PERSON.—The term ‘‘person’’ has the 

8 meaning given such term in section 551(2) of title 

9 5, United States Code. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 14,

2015

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 15

- 00374

- CR

LUIS ANTONIO GALLEG OS , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 179th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1459867

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
This is an appeal from a judgment signed April 2, 201 5. On July 8, 2015, appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex . R. App. P. 42.2(a) . The motion is granted.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Boyce, McCally, and Donovan
#### BALTIMORE & O. R. CO. v. FRIEL.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

December 2, 1896.)

No. 32,

September Term, 1896.

Appeal from Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Before DALLAS, Circuit Judge, and BUTLER and WALES, District Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This case is disposed of by the opinion filed herewith in the case of the same plaintiff in error against Friel, defendant in error. 77 Fed. 126. The judgment is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       5,790,909
<SECURITIES>                                   662,233
<RECEIVABLES>                               17,151,725
<ALLOWANCES>                                   624,154
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            26,819,392
<PP&E>                                       7,663,046
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,385,572
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              36,591,399
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       19,400,689
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           695
<OTHER-SE>                                  16,028,765
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                36,591,399
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            17,023,886
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            16,478,590
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             101,280
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                646,576
<INCOME-TAX>                                   112,985
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            533,591
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   533,591
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.07
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 23
                                                      ----------




                                   [LOGO]
                     SHATSWELL, MACLEOD & COMPANY, P.C.
                     ----------------------------------
                        CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


                  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated January
13, 2004 (except for Note 14 as to which the date is January 22, 2004) with
respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Slade's Ferry Bancorp. and
Subsidiary as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related consolidated
statements of income, changes in stockholders' equity and cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2003 which
report appears in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2003 of Slade's Ferry Bancorp.



                                    /S/Shatswell, MacLeod & Company, P.C.
                                    Shatswell, MacLeod & Company, P.C.

West Peabody, Massachusetts
March 24, 2004


           83 PINE STREET  WEST PEABODY, MASSACHUSETTS  01960-3635
             TELEPHONE (978) 535-0206  FACSIMILE (978) 535-9908
                  smc@shatswell.com      www.shatswell.com


<PAGE>
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2650 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2650

  To designate the United States courthouse under construction at 510 
  19th Street, Bakersfield, California, as the Myron Donovan Crocker 
                       United States Courthouse.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 26, 2011

  Mr. Costa introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To designate the United States courthouse under construction at 510 
  19th Street, Bakersfield, California, as the Myron Donovan Crocker 
                       United States Courthouse.

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

SECTION 1. MYRON DONOVAN CROCKER UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE.

    (a) Designation.--The United States courthouse under construction, 
as of the date of enactment of this Act, at 510 19th Street, 
Bakersfield, California, shall be known and designated as the ``Myron 
Donovan Crocker United States Courthouse''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the United States 
courthouse referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a 
reference to the ``Myron Donovan Crocker United States Courthouse''.
                                 <all>
```