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


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                   JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                     MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         0
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      1,090
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                      50
<OTHER-SE>                                (1,140)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   0
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              3,428
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (3,428)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                              (3,428)
<EPS-BASIC>                               (0.01)<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                             (0.01)
<FN>
<F1>*Less than .01 per share
</FN>



</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                   EXHIBIT 11.1

                           AMCON Distributing Company
                  Statement of Computation of Per Share Earnings
              for the years ended September 30, 1996, 1995, and 1994

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                               for the years ended September 30,
                                             --------------------------------------
                                                1996         1995          1994
                                            -----------    ---------    -----------
<S>                                              <C>          <C>           <C>
1.  Weighted average common
     shares outstanding                       2,445,903    2,449,357      2,450,000

2.  Weighted average of net additional
     shares outstanding assuming dilutive
     warrants exercised and proceeds used
     to purchase treasury stock                       -       28,690         41,996
                                              ---------    ---------      ---------
3.  Weighted average number of common 
     and common equivalent shares 
     outstanding                              2,445,903    2,478,047      2,491,996
                                              =========    =========      =========

4.  Income before extraordinary item        $ 1,336,374    $ 921,560    $ 1,297,228

    Extraordinary item                                -            -       (295,693)

    Net income                                1,336,374      921,560      1,001,535

    Accretion of warrants                             -            -       (133,312)

    Accretion of preferred stock                (83,333)    (100,000)       (16,667)
                                            -----------    ---------    -----------
    Net income attributable to common
     shareholders                           $ 1,253,041    $ 821,560    $   851,556
                                            ===========    =========    ===========

5.  Earnings per common and common
     equivalent share attributable to
     common shareholders:

       Income before extraordinary item
        (net of accretion)                        $0.51        $0.33          $0.46

       Extraordinary item                             -            -          (0.12)
                                            -----------    ---------    -----------
       Net earnings                               $0.51        $0.33          $0.34
                                            ===========    =========    ===========

</TABLE>
NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________ No. 23

- 2349

___________ In re: DONALD COLE ,

Petitioner

____________________________________ On Appeal for Writ of Mandamus from the Unit ed States Dis trict C ourt for the District o f Delaware (Related to D. Del. No. 1:10- cv -00088)

____________________________________ Submitte d Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

o n September 21, 2023 Before: HARDIMAN , RESTREPO, and BIBAS , Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: October 12, 2023)2 ___________ OPINION *

___________ PER CURIAM Donald Cole filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. For the reasons that follow, we will dismiss the petition as moot. Cole filed a civil rights complaint and was appointed counsel. In September 2021,Cole’s counsel signed a settlement agreement. After the District Court entered a final order dismissing the case and awarding attorneys’ fees and costs, Cole filed a motion in September 2007 pursuant to Rule 60(b) for relief from the judgment and a motion to set aside the settlement agreement. On July 23, 2023, Cole filed his petition for a writ of mandamus in which he requested that we order the District Court to adjudicate his motion for relief from judgment. By order entered August 23, 2023, the District Court noted that Cole had argued in his filings that the settlement agreement was invalid but also that the defendants had breached the agreement. I t denied the motion for relief from judgment and motion to set aside the settlement without prejudice to allow Cole to clarify how he wished to proceed. Cole filed a motion to set aside the settlement agreement which is pending. Cole has now filed a moti on to deem his petition moot and for a refund of the docketing fees. We agree that Cole’s request that we order the District Court to rule on his

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full C ourt and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.3

motions is moot. See Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp. , 77 F.3d 690, 698

– 99 (3d Cir. 1996) (noting that “[i ]f developments occur during the course of adjudication that . . . prevent a court from being able to grant the requested relief, the case must be dismissed as moot.”). We will dismiss the petition for a writ of mandamus as moot. Cole’s request for a

re fund of the docketing fees is denied. See Porter v. Dep’t of Treasury , 564 F.3d 176, 179 (3d Cir. 2009)

.
#### Nelson Alberto ALAS-LEMUS, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 09-70401.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 8, 2011.*

Filed March 17, 2011.

Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

*602Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Nelson Alberto Alas-Lemus, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo the BIA’s legal conclusions and review for substantial evidence factual findings. *Barrios v. Holder,*581 F.3d 849, 854 (9th Cir.2009). We deny the petition for review.

Alas-Lemus has waived any challenge to BIA’s finding that his asylum application was untimely by failing to argue the issue in his opening brief. *See Martinez-Serrano v. INS,*94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996) (holding that issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived).

Even if Alas-Lemus testified credibly, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of Alas-Lemus’ withholding of deportation claim because the threats made against him did not rise to the level of persecution. *See Lim v. INS,*224 F.3d 929, 936 (9th Cir.2000). Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s determination that Alas-Lemus failed to demonstrate a well-founded fear of future persecution because it is too speculative he will be persecuted in El Salvador on account of a protected ground. *See Nagoulko v. INS,*333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir.2003) (record evidence did not show petitioner had objectively reasonable basis for future fear).

Finally, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because Alas-Lemus did not establish a likelihood of being tortured in El Salvador. *See Arteaga v. Mukasey,*511 F.3d 940, 948-49 (9th Cir.2007).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### Zeferino Araiza FLORES, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 09-73371.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 15, 2011.*

Filed March 9, 2011.

R. Wayne McMillan, Law Office of R. Wayne McMillan, Pasadena, CA, for Petitioner.

Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Oil, Virginia Lum, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

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 **

Zeferino Araiza Flores, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, *Iturribarria v. INS,*321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and we deny the petition for review.

To the extent we have jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of Araiza Flores’ motion to reopen, *see Fernandez v. Gonzales,*439 F.3d 592, 601 (9th Cir.2006), we conclude that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening, *see Singh v. INS,*295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed if it is “arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law”).

Araiza Flores’ contention that the BIA abused its discretion under *Ramirez-Alejandre v. Ashcroft,*320 F.3d 858 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc), is without merit.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
2012 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

4-12-2012 

# D es mond M a

y n a r d v . VI C omm L a

b or

P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : P r e c e de n t i al

D ock e t N o . 10-3476

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w

. v i l l a no v a

. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2012

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. I t h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2012 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w

. v i l l a no v a

. e du

. R e c omme nde d C it a t ion

" D e s mond M a

y n a r d v . VI C omm L a

bor " (2012). 2012 D e cisio n s

. P a pe r 1064. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w

. v i l l a no v a

. e du/thir dc ir c uit_2012/1064

### 1 PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_____________
No. 10

- 3476

_____________ DESMOND L. MAYNARD, Appellant

v.

CARMELO RIVERA, COMMISSIONER OF THE VIRGINS ISLANDS DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; CHERYL MARTIN

- LIBURD

______________

AP PEAL FROM the District COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS

– APPELLATE DIVISION (D.C. Civil No. 05

- cv

- 00171) Chief Judge: Honorable Curtis V. Gómez District Judge: Honorable Raymond L. Finch Superior Court Judge: Honorable Patricia D. Steele

______________ Argued December 5, 2011

______________ Before: FISHER, GREENAWAY, JR., and ROTH, Circuit Judges

.

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

It appearing that due to a word processing error the section titles were omitted from the opinion filed on April 2, 2012, it is hereby O R D E R E D that the opinion is amended so that the section titles are included as follows:

I. BACKGROUND

### 2 II. JURISDICTION AND STANDARD OF REVIEW

III. ANALYSIS

IV. CONCLUSION

For the Court,

Marcia M. Waldron, Cler k

Date: April 12, 2012 TMK/smw/cc: Shawn E. Maynard

- Hahnfeld, Esq.

Tiffany V. Monrose, Esq. William W. Franks, Esq. Tina G. La Borde, Esq.
Exhibit 32.2 Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code  I, Michael J. Marx, the Chief Financial Officer of Nano Mask, Inc. (Nano Mask), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (i) the accompanying Form 10-Q of Nano Mask for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Nano Mask.   /s/ Michael J. Marx Michael J. Marx Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)  June 30, 2011
Exhibit 10.1





 


	Cupit,
                                         Milligan,

        Ogden & Williams

        Certified Public Accountants
	
        Shareholders

        Edward R. Cupit, CPA, (1943-2010)

        Ronald A. Milligan, CPA

        Thomas M. Ogden, CPA

        Melvin L. Williams, CPA

        Michael T. Metkovich, CPA



  


1695 Meadow
Wood Lane, Suite 100


Reno, Nevada 89502


(775) 827-5055 


Fax (775) 827-6356










December
23, 2014


 


Searchlight
Minerals Corp.


2360
West Horizon Ridge Pkwy, Ste #100 B


Henderson,
NV 89052


 


Gentlemen:


 


Attached
is a copy of our most recent invoice dated November 30, 2014 and statement of balance owed to our firm for services outstanding
in the total balance of $115,017.68.


 


Melvin
Williams has informed us the Board of Directors, in a meeting on December 23, 2014, approved settling this balance with issuance
of shares of common stock in Searchlight Minerals Corp. at the closing market price of $0.32 of that same day.


 


This
represents issuance of 359,430 shares on December 23, 2014. The shares should be issued directly to Melvin L. Williams and the
outstanding balance of $115,017.68 owing to the firm of Cupit, Milligan, Ogden & Williams will be cleared internally between
the firm and Mr. Williams resulting in a zero balance as of November 30, 2014.


 


Please
coordinate any necessary items related to the stock issuance directly with Mr. Williams


 


We
appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the company.


 


Very
truly yours,


 


/s/
Ronald A. Milligan


Ronald
A. Milligan, CPA


Treasurer


 


 


/s/
Melvin L. Williams


Melvin
L. Williams, CPA


President


 




 


 





Member of American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants Division of Firms
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 11
                              Earnings Per Share

Basic and diluted earning per share were computed as follows:
(In thousands, except per share data)

                                                   Three months    Nine months
                                                      ended           ended
                                                   Sept.30, 2000   Sept.30, 2000
                                                   -------------   -------------
Basic earnings per share:
Earnings available for common shares:
Net income                                           $  520          $ 1,447
Weighted average common shares outstanding            3,056            3,165
Basic earnings per share                             $ 0.17          $  0.46
                                                     ======          =======

Diluted earnings per share:
Earnings available for common shares and
common stock equivalent shares deemed to
have a dilutive effect:                                 520             1447
Weighted average common shares outstanding            3,056            3,165
Additional potentially dilutive securities
(equivalent in common stock):
Stock options                                            10                0
Unearned compensation                                     2                0
                                                     ------          -------
Total                                                 3,068            3,165
Diluted earnings per share                           $ 0.17          $  0.46
                                                     ======          =======

The additional potentially dilutive securities calculation for the year 2000
excludes an average of 38,971 of options and 12,204 stock grants, respectively,
because the exercise price of the options and the award price of the stock
grants were greater than the average market price.
Exhibit 32



Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of eUniverse, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the SEC on or
about the date hereof (the Report), Brett C. Brewer, as Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Thomas J. Flahie, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to his knowledge that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.



|Date: November 12, 2003 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Brett C. Brewer                                                    
|----------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                        |  |  |  |  |  | Brett C. Brewer                                                        
|                        |  |  |  |  |  | President and Principal Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
|                        |  |  | 
|Date: November 12, 2003 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Thomas J. Flahie                                                   
|                        |  |  |  |  |  | Thomas J. Flahie                                                       
|                        |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                   1,000
       
<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                 Jan-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                   Jun-30-1997
<CASH>                                 156
<SECURITIES>                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                           58
<ALLOWANCES>                             0
<INVENTORY>                            185
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                       451
<PP&E>                               14290
<DEPRECIATION>                         549
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       16986
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 7569
<BONDS>                                  0
<COMMON>                              8549
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                              0
<OTHER-SE>                             (83)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         16986
<SALES>                               1369
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      1371
<CGS>                                 1573
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         1573
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     330
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       (556)
<INCOME-TAX>                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                   (556)
<DISCONTINUED>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<CHANGES>                                0
<NET-INCOME>                          (556)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                         (.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                         (.20)
                            

</TABLE>
Exhibit 4.1


 


THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON


NEW YORK’S FIRST BANK-FOUNDED 1784 BY ALEXANDER HAMILTON


 


 


2 HANSON PLACE, 12TH FLOOR, BROOKLYN,
N.Y. 11217


 


 


 


December 19, 2014


 


Hennion & Walsh, Inc.


2001 Route 46, Waterview Plaza


Parsippany, New Jersey 07054


 


Smart Trust, Diversified Income & Growth
Trust, Series 6


Dear Sirs:


The Bank of New York
Mellon is acting as trustee for Smart Trust, Diversified Income & Growth Trust, Series 6 set forth above (the “Trust”).
We enclosed a list of the Securities to be deposited in the Trust on the date hereof. The prices indicated therein reflect our
evaluation of such Securities as of close of business on December 18, 2014, in accordance with the valuation method set forth in
the Trust Indenture and Agreement. We consent to the reference to The Bank of New York Mellon as the party performing the evaluations
of the Trust Securities in the Registration Statement (No. 333-199854) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission with respect
to the registration of the sale of the Trust Units and to the filing of this consent as an exhibit thereto.


 


 


Very truly yours,


 


/s/ GERARDO CIPRIANO_______________ 


Gerardo Cipriano


Vice President