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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         (4,006)
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  413,233
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               409,227
<PP&E>                                       4,320,475
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,729,201
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,002,653
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        14,873
<OTHER-SE>                                     727,048
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,729,201
<SALES>                                         43,166
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                59,174
<CGS>                                           53,173
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               154,806
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              69,616
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (218,421)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (218,421)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (218,421)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (.015)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.014)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
FORM 10QSB - CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF MARCH 31, 1999 AND
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF EARNINGS (LOSS) FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD
ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                 DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                    JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                      MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                                 31,476
<SECURITIES>                                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          68,795
<ALLOWANCES>                                                0
<INVENTORY>                                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      137,771
<PP&E>                                                180,561
<DEPRECIATION>                                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        651,999
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 290,913
<BONDS>                                                     0
<COMMON>                                               32,736
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                            328,350
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          651,999
<SALES>                                               226,337
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      226,337
<CGS>                                                   9,890
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           9,890
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      237,659
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       (21,101)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   (21,101)
<DISCONTINUED>                                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                          (21,101)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0.00
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32

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 Annual Report of Ultimate Electronics, Inc. (the "Registrant") on Form 10-K for the year ended January 31,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|Date:    April 15, 2004 |  |                                                                                                                  
|----------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|By:                     |  | /s/DAVID J. WORKMANDavid J. Workman President and Chief Executive Officer                                        
|Date:    April 15, 2004 |  |                                                                                                                  
|By:                     |  | /s/ALAN E. KESSOCKAlan E. Kessock Senior Vice PresidentFinance, Chief Financial Officer,
Secretary and Treasurer

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Ultimate Electronics, Inc. and will be retained by Ultimate
Electronics, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---

QuickLinks
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2096 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2096

 To amend the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 to promote the export of 
            goods and services that benefit the environment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 12, 1993

Mr. Kennedy (for himself and Mr. Studds) introduced the following bill; 
   which was referred to the Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 to promote the export of 
            goods and services that benefit the environment.

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

SECTION 1. PROMOTION OF EXPORTS OF ENVIRONMENTALLY BENEFICIAL GOODS AND 
              SERVICES.

    Section 11 of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C. 635i-5) 
is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a)(1)(A), by striking ``long-term 
        support of $10,000,000'' and inserting ``medium- or long-term 
        support of $7,000,000''; and
            (2) in subsection (b)--
                    (A) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)'';
                    (B) by inserting ``(such as by encouraging 
                environmentally sustainable development, promoting 
                efficient use of resources, and promoting energy 
                efficiency)'' before the period at the end of the 1st 
                sentence; and
                    (C) by adding after and below the end the 
                following:
    ``(2) In addition to other funds available to support the export of 
goods and services described in paragraph (1), there are authorized to 
be appropriated to the Bank not exceeding $500,000,000 to support such 
exports.''.

                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.13


    
      

    

    Exhibit
      10.13

     

    Form
      of

    Amendment
      No. 1

    to

    Security
      Agreement

    


    Between

    


    RIO
      VISTA OPERATING PARTNERSHIP, L.P.

     

    And

    


    TRANSMONTAIGNE
      PRODUCT SERVICES INC.

    


    TransMontaigne
      Product Services Inc. (“TPSI”) and Rio Vista Operating Partnership, L.P. (“Rio”)
      entered into a Security Agreement dated August 15, 2005” (“Security Agreement”)
      pursuant to the terms of that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement dated August
      15, 2005 (“Agreement”) between the same parties. In accordance with the Amended
      and Restated Agreement dated August 15, 2006, Rio and TPSI agreed to amend
      the
      Security Agreement, effective as of the Closing Date of the Amended and Restated
      Agreement, as follows:

    


    1.    In
      the
      first line of Section 2.1, delete the words “Debtor’s Collateral, as that term
      is defined in Section 3.1(d)”, and insert in their place “Debtor’s New
      Collateral, as that term is defined in Section 3.1(e)”. In the third line of
      Section 2.1, after the date “August 15, 2005,” insert “.., as amended and
      restated on August 15, 2006.” In the 9th
      line of
      the same section, after the amount “$1,300,000.00,” insert the
      following:

    


    “,
      plus
      interest as described in the Promissory Note executed by Debtor in favor of
      Creditor of even date with this Agreement (the “Promissory Note”).

    


    2.    In
      Section 5.1, delete everything after the words “until paid,” and insert in their
      place “in accordance with the Promissory Note.”

    


    3.    Delete
      Section 5.7 in its entirety.


    
      
        
        

      

      
        
        

        
          

        

      

      
        
        

      

    


    4.    The
      other
      terms of the Security Agreement remain unchanged and the parties hereby ratify
      and confirm them.

     

    
      
        	
                TRANSMONTAIGNE
                  PRODUCT SERVICES INC.

              	 	
                RIO
                  VISTA OPERATING PARTNERSHIP,
                  LP

              
	 	 	 
	
                By:

              	 	 	
                By:
                  

              	 
	
                Name:
                  William S. Dickey

              	 	
                Name:
                  Charles Handly

              
	
                Title:  
                  President

              	 	
                Title:  
                  President
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**Consent of Independent Accountants**

 

Wehereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statementson Form S-8(Nos. 33-74556, 33-87758, 33-87760, 333-06673, 333-45917,333-58688 and 333-58690) of GreenPoint Financial Corp. of our report datedJanuary 21, 2003 relating to the financial statements, which appears in thisAnnual Report to Shareholders on Form 10-K.

 

 
| /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
|                           |
| New York, New York             |
| March 28, 2003                 |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2000 and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000829549
<NAME>                        ADVANCED TISSUE SCIENCES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                             34,298
<SECURITIES>                                        3,959
<RECEIVABLES>                                       1,539
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                         5,693
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   46,648
<PP&E>                                             33,315
<DEPRECIATION>                                    (18,800)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     66,641
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               9,307
<BONDS>                                             7,043
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                              642
<OTHER-SE>                                         42,152
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       66,641
<SALES>                                             9,497
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   19,453
<CGS>                                               9,497
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      30,310
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (10,392)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 (1,232)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (21,240)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (21,240)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (21,240)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.36)



</TABLE>
#### Brian Keith NESBITT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; Tyger River Correctional Institution; Tim Riley, Warden Tyger River Correctional; William R. Byars, Jr., Director of South Carolina Department of Corrections; Richard Turner; John E. Ozmint; Gary Lane; Laura Caldwell; S. Edmisten; Sergeant Mcmorris; FSD Fowler; David Tatarsky, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 14-6114.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 17, 2014.

Decided: April 22, 2014.

Brian Keith Nesbitt, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Brian Keith Nesbitt appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Nesbitt v. S.C. Dep’t of Corr.,*No. 0:13-cv-02456-RMG (D.S.C. Jan. 8, 2014). 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.*
**MP** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 19 - 0289 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JAMES MICHAEL WEBB, JR. ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellees ’ motion for a 6 0 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is gran ted an extension of time to and including November 17 , 2020 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 11 2020

09/11/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0289
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Reginald AKINS, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 09-10524.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 7, 2010.*

Filed Dec. 20, 2010.

*215Keslie Stewart, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Oakland, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Christopher Cannon, Sugarman & Cannon, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: COWEN **, TASHIMA and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

**

 The Honorable Robert E. Cowen, Senior United States Circuit Judge for the Third Circuit, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Reginald Akins appeals from the sentence imposed by the District Court after it granted his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his conviction as to one of the five counts on which he was originally convicted and sentenced. It is uncontested that we have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and that Akins’s notice of appeal was otherwise timely filed. This Court further exercises de novo review of the district court’s exercise of jurisdiction and of Akins’s constitutional challenges to his sentence. *See, e.g., United States v. Raygosa-Esparza,*566 F.3d 852, 854 (9th Cir.2009); *United States v. Hock,*172 F.3d 676, 680 (9th Cir.1999); *United States v.McClain,*133 F.3d 1191, 1193 (9th Cir.1998). We affirm.

It appears well established that the sentencing process in the multiple-count context generally involves assembling the proper overall sentencing “bundle” or “package.” *See, e.g., United States v. Avila-Anguiano,*609 F.3d 1046, 1049 (9th Cir. 2010), *cert. denied,*— U.S. —, 131 S.Ct. 586, 178 L.Ed.2d 427 (2010). We accordingly have determined that the district court possesses the jurisdiction to *216reexamine and alter its prior sentencing determination after vacating the defendant’s conviction on fewer than all of the counts pursuant to § 2255. *United States v. Barron,*172 F.3d 1153, 1160 (9th Cir. 1999) (en banc); *Hock,*172 F.3d at 680-81; *McClain,*133 F.3d at 1193; *United States v. Handa,*122 F.3d 690, 691-92 (9th Cir. 1997).

Turning to Akins’s constitutional challenges, we conclude that he lacked any legitimate expectation of finality. *See United States v. Radmall,*340 F.3d 798, 800-01 (9th Cir.2003); *McClain,*133 F.3d at 1193-94; *Handa,*122 F.3d at 692. Likewise, it does not appear that the District Court acted vindictively or otherwise imposed a more severe sentence because Akins succeeded in obtaining relief under § 2255. *See, e.g., United States v. Ponce,*51 F.3d 820, 826 (9th Cir.1995) (per curiam). On the contrary, we conclude that the District Court properly reexamined Akins’s prior sentencing and then imposed a reasonable and appropriate sentence by reducing his overall term of imprisonment from 384 months to 252 months (a reduction of 11 years).

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### Jerry L. GRIST, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 10-7086.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Feb. 1, 2011.

Jerry L. Grist, Texarkana, TX, pro se.

Linda A. Epperley, Ryan M. Roberts, Office of the United States Attorney, Muskogee, OK, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before LUCERO, ANDERSON, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

NEIL M. GORSUCH, Circuit Judge.

Jerry Grist, a federal prisoner proceeding *pro se,*seeks to challenge his 2005 conviction for possession of methamphetamine by writ of *coram nobis,*or, in the alternative, writ of *audita querela.*He says that newly discovered evidence demonstrates that a government witness perpetrated a “fraud on the court” at a pre-trial suppression hearing, and so asks us to vacate the resulting conviction.

*207Although we construe Mr. Grist’s papers liberally, we cannot overlook his petition’s fatal flaw. A petitioner may not resort to the writs of *coram nobis*or *audita querela*when other remedies are available, such as a motion to vacate a sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. *See United States v. Torres,*282 F.3d 1241, 1245 (10th Cir.2002). As Mr. Grist is a prisoner in federal custody, the exclusive remedy for testing the validity of his conviction is that provided by motion under § 2255 — that is, unless he can show that remedy is inadequate or ineffective. *See Bradshaw v. Story,*86 F.3d 164, 166 (10th Cir.1996). We cannot discern any reason why the remedy provided by § 2255 is inadequate or ineffective to test Mr. Grist’s conviction. The fact that he faces procedural obstacles to bringing a second or successive § 2255 motion, *see*§ 2255(h), is no basis for invoking the ancient writs. *See Torres,*282 F.3d at 1246 (“To allow a petitioner to avoid the bar against successive § 2255 petitions by simply styling a petition under a different name would severely erode [§ 2255’s] procedural restraints.”).

The denial of the motion is *affirmed.*

*

 After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to grant the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(f) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R.App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 14 , 2017 

# Order

Clerk July 14 , 2017

153309 (109)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

SC: 153309

v COA: 321551

Genesee CC: 13

- 033003

- FC

ANDREW MAURICE RANDOLPH,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendant

- appellant to extend the time

for filing hi s supplemental brief is GRANTED. The brief will be accepted as tim ely filed

if submitted on or before August 9 , 2017. The same extension is given to plaintiff

appellee to file it s supplemental brief.