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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<CIK>0000927362
<NAME>PRI AUTOMATION, INC
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          57,047
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   46,712
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,252
<INVENTORY>                                     27,494
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               143,087
<PP&E>                                          38,558
<DEPRECIATION>                                  18,252
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 167,478
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           42,639
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           212
<OTHER-SE>                                     122,928
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   167,478
<SALES>                                        171,791
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               203,545
<CGS>                                          105,342
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  124,755
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               107,943<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,724
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 137
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (30,389)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (7,766)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (22,623)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (22,623)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.08)
<FN>
<F1>Includes $8,417 acquired in-process R&D and $10,091 merger costs and special
charges
</FN>


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

              Wilsons The Leather Experts Inc. and Subsidiaries
                          Net Income Per Common Share
                   (In Thousands, Except Per Share Amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                         Quarter       Quarter
                                                          Ended         Ended
                                                       May 1, 1999   May 2, 1998
                                                       -----------   -----------
<S>                                                    <C>           <C>
Net income                                              $  (2,997)    $  (4,537)
                                                       ===========   ===========
Weighted average common shares outstanding - basic         10,836         9,532

Effect of options granted(1)                               N/A           N/A
Effect of warrant(1)                                       N/A           N/A
                                                       -----------   -----------

Weighted average common shares outstanding - basic
  and diluted                                              10,836         9,532
                                                       ===========   ===========
Basic and diluted net income per common share(1)        $   (0.28)    $   (0.48)
                                                       ===========   ===========
</TABLE>

       Note 1: Under Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No.
               128 "Earnings per Share," common stock equivalents are
               excluded when computing diluted net income of loss per
               common share if the effect is anti-dilutive.
Exhibit 4.1

 

RICHMONT CAPITAL PARTNERS V LP

 

	
 
    	
November 26,   2014
    


 

CVSL Inc.

2400 North Dallas Parkway, Suite 230

Plano, Texas 75093

Attn: Kelly L. Kittrell

 

Re:          Conversion of $20.0 Million Note

 

Dear Kelly:

 

Reference is made to that certain Second Amendment dated June 12, 2014 to the Convertible Subordinated Unsecured Promissory Note, issued dated December 12, 2012, in the principal amount of $20.0 Million held by the undersigned (herein, the “Note”).

 

The undersigned hereby agrees to convert the Note, effective as of the date hereof, into Three Million Two Hundred Thousand (3,200,000) shares of CVSL’s common stock.

 

	
 
    	
RICMONT CAPITAL PARTNERS V LP
    
	
 
    	
By: Richmont Street LLC, its General Partner
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/   John Rochon, Jr.
    
	
 
    	
Name:
    	
John   Rochon, Jr.
    
	
 
    	
Title:
    	
President
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
ACKNOWLEDGED   AND AGREED:
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
CVSL INC.
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
/s/   John P. Rochon
    
	
 
    	
Name:
    	
John   P. Rochon
    
	
 
    	
Title:
    	
Chief   Executive Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dwayne Curtis DELESTON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-7435.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 31, 2011.

Decided: April 5, 2011.

Dwayne Curtis Deleston, Appellant Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Dwayne Curtis Deleston seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion and related motions. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Deleston has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We *267dispense 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.*
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 193 (Friday, October 6, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 46811]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21527]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; 
Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive 
and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Renal and Urological 
Clinical Small Business Applications.
    Date: November 10, 2017.
    Time: 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 
Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Ryan G. Morris, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, 
Room 7015, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-2542, 301-
594-4721, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2b59524a45054644595942586b454243054c445d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="abd9d2cac585c6c4d9d9c2d8ebc5c2c385ccc4dd">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, 
Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive 
Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology 
and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 2, 2017.
David Clary,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-21527 Filed 10-5-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

LARRY L. STEWART,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

No. 95-6919

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of

the Virginia Department of

Corrections,

Respondent-Appellee.

LARRY L. STEWART,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

No. 95-7236

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of

the Virginia Department of

Corrections,

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk.

J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior District Judge.

(CA-94-704-2)

Submitted: September 19, 1995

Decided: March 11, 1996

Before WIDENER, HALL, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

No. 95-6919 vacated and remanded and No. 95-7236 dismissed by

unpublished per curiam opinion.
COUNSEL

Larry L. Stewart, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Richard Curry, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Larry Stewart seeks to appeal the

district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988)

petition, and the district court's order denying him leave to proceed

on appeal in forma pauperis. Our review of the record in appeal number 95-6919 reveals that Stewart's habeas petition contained both

exhausted and unexhausted claims, including an unexhausted claim of

actual innocence based on an affidavit of the victim of the crime

underlying Stewart's conviction. Because of Stewart's unexhausted

claim of actual innocence, which was based on newly discovered evidence, the district court should have either dismissed Stewart's entire

petition without prejudice, or permitted Stewart to amend his petition

to drop this unexhausted claim. See Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 520,

522 (1982). Accordingly, in appeal number 95-6919 we grant leave

to proceed in forma pauperis and a certificate or probable cause to

appeal, vacate the district court's order, and remand for further proceedings consistent with these options.

Regarding appeal number 95-7236, we note that Fed. R. App. P.

24(a) does not contemplate appeals from district court orders denying

leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, but rather directs a litigant whose motion is denied by the district court to file a successive

and independent motion for such relief in the court of appeals. See

United States v. Boutwell, 896 F.2d 884, 889 (5th Cir. 1990). Stewart

 2
did not file such a motion and were we to construe his appeal as such

a motion, it would be denied. We therefore deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and

dismiss appeal number 95-7236. 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.

No. 95-6919 - VACATED AND REMANDED

No. 95-7236 - DISMISSED

 3
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 19, 2019

No. 04-19-00242-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF S.M.H., et al., children,

From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018PA01398

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The Court Reporter’s Notification of Late record is GRANTED. The reporter’s record is 

due on June 21, 2019.

___________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 19th day of June, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
46936 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 648 

[Docket No. 161017970–6999–02] 

RIN 0648–XF722 

Fisheries of the Northeastern United 

States; Summer Flounder Fishery; 

Quota Transfer 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary rule; quota transfer. 

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the 

State of New Jersey is transferring a 

portion of its 2017 commercial summer 

flounder quota to the State of Rhode 

Island. This quota adjustment is 

necessary to comply with the Summer 

Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass 

Fishery Management Plan quota transfer 

provisions. This announcement informs 

the public of the revised commercial 

quotas for New Jersey and Rhode Island. 

DATES: Effective October 4, 2017, 

through December 31, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cynthia Hanson, Fishery Management 

Specialist, (978) 281–9180. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulations governing the summer 

flounder fishery are found in 50 CFR 

648.100 through 648.110. These 

regulations require annual specification 

of a commercial quota that is 

apportioned among the coastal states 

from Maine through North Carolina. The 

process to set the annual commercial 

quota and the percent allocated to each 

state is described in § 648.102, and the 

initial 2017 allocations were published 

on December 22, 2016 (81 FR 93842). 

The final rule implementing 

Amendment 5 to the Summer Flounder 

Fishery Management Plan, as published 

in the Federal Register on December 17, 

1993 (58 FR 65936), provided a 

mechanism for transferring summer 

flounder commercial quota from one 

state to another. Two or more states, 

under mutual agreement and with the 

concurrence of the NMFS Greater 

Atlantic Regional Administrator, can 

transfer or combine summer flounder 

commercial quota under § 648.102(c)(2). 

The Regional Administrator is required 

to consider the criteria in 

§ 648.102(c)(2)(i)(A) through (C) in the 

evaluation of requests for quota transfers 

or combinations. 

New Jersey is transferring 380 lb (172 

kg) of summer flounder commercial 

quota to Rhode Island. This transfer was 

requested to repay landings by a New 

Jersey-permitted vessel that landed in 

Rhode Island under a safe harbor 

agreement. 

The revised summer flounder quotas 

for calendar year 2017 are now: New 

Jersey, 946,132 lb (429,158 kg); and 

Rhode Island, 887,922 lb (402,755 kg); 

based on the initial quotas published in 

the 2017 Summer Flounder, Scup, and 

Black Sea Bass Specifications and 

subsequent transfers. 

Classification 

This action is taken under 50 CFR 

part 648 and is exempt from review 

under Executive Order 12866. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Dated: October 4, 2017. 

Emily H. Menashes, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2017–21739 Filed 10–4–17; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


Pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 20-0118 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiffand Appellee, v. TERENCE R.PASSMORE,

Defendant and Appellant. 

# FILED MAR 0 5 2021 Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Supreme Court State of Montana ORDER

Appellant has filed a motion for a 90-day extension oftime to file his reply brief in the referenced matter. IT IS ORDERED that the motion for extension is GRANTED. Appellant has until June 7,2021,within which to file his reply brief. No further extensions will be granted. DATED this 5 —

day ofMarch,2021. For the Court,
ChiefJustice 03/05/2021
Case Number: DA 20-0118
#### William B. BURLEIGH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF MONTEREY, a public entity, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 09-15908.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*744Submitted Feb. 15, 2011*

Filed March 10, 2011.

William B. Burleigh, Carmel Valley, CA, pro se.

Frank G. Tiesen, Esquire, Kathryn Reimann, Salinas, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

William B. Burleigh appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that the County of Monterey violated his equal protection and due process rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Toguchi v. Chung,*391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Burleigh failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendant violated his rights by denying him a building permit. *See N. Pacifica LLC v. City of Pacifica,*526 F.3d 478, 486 (9th Cir.2008) (“In order to claim a violation of equal protection in a class of one case, the plaintiff must establish that the [government entity] intentionally, and without rational basis, treated the plaintiff differently from others similarly situated.”); *Shanks v. Dressel,*540 F.3d 1082, 1090 (9th Cir.2008) (procedural due process violation requires a deprivation of a protected liberty interest by the government and lack of process); *Dodd v. Hood River Cnty.,*59 F.3d 852, 864 (9th Cir.1995) (“Federal judicial interference with a local government zoning decision is proper only where the government body could have no legitimate reason for its decision.”).

We do not address issues that Burleigh has not raised or argued on appeal. *See Cook v. Schriro,*538 F.3d 1000, 1014 n. 5 (9th Cir.2008).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 12

- 00514

- CR

Kelvin Houston a/k/a Kevin Houston

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 362nd District Court

o f Denton County (F

- 2009

- 2858

- D )

August 22, 2013

Opinion by Justice Walker

(p)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was error in the trial court’s judgmen t. The judgment is modified to delete

the requirement that appellant reimburse compensation paid by Denton County

to any appointed cou nsel on this cause. It is ordered that the judgment of the

trial court is affirmed as modified.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By

_________________________________ Justice Sue Walker
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 190 (Tuesday, October 3, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46057-46058]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21241]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings; Deletion of Items From Sunshine Act 
Meeting

September 22, 2017.
    The following items have been deleted from the list of items 
scheduled for consideration at the Tuesday, September 26, 2017, Open 
Meeting and previously listed in the Commission's Notice of September 
19, 2017.

[[Page 46058]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.....................  MEDIA................  TITLE: Cable Television
                                                Technical and
                                                Operational Standards
                                                (MB Docket No. 12-217)
                                               SUMMARY: The Commission
                                                will consider a Report
                                                and Order that
                                                modernizes its cable
                                                television technical
                                                rules to reflect the
                                                cable industry's use of
                                                digital transmission
                                                systems.
3.....................  MEDIA................  TITLE: Revitalization of
                                                the AM Radio Service (MB
                                                Docket No. 13-249)
                                               SUMMARY: The Commission
                                                will consider a Third
                                                Report and Order that
                                                will relax or eliminate
                                                certain rules pertaining
                                                to AM broadcasters
                                                employing and
                                                maintaining directional
                                                antenna arrays.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Federal Communications Commission.

Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-21241 Filed 9-29-17; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P