alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
----

----

| (Mark      One) |                                                                                    |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  x         | QUARTERLY REPORT      UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF  1934 |

| o | TRANSITION REPORT      UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE EXCHANGEACT |
|---|---------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | Safe      Technologies International, Inc.                             |   |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | (Exact name of small      business issuer as specified in its charter) |   |

|   | Delaware                                    |   | 22-2824492               |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------|--------|
|   | (State or other      jurisdiction of   |   | (IRS    Employer         |   |
|   | incorporation or      organization)    |   | Identification      No.) |   |

|   | 1200      N Federal Highway, Suite 200, Boca Raton, FL 33432 |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | (Address of      principal executive offices)                |   |

|   |                                                                                        |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | (866)      297-5070                                                                         |   |
|   | (Issuer's telephone      number)                                                            |   |
|   |  __________________________________(Former      address, if changed since last report) |   |
|   |                                                                                        |   |

----

|                               | Safe      Technologies International, Inc. (Registrant) |                                |
|------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|
|                               |                                                         |                                |   |
| Date:      November 23, 2009  | By:                                                          | /s/Christopher      L. Kolb         |   |
|                               |                                                         | Christopher      L. Kolb, President |   |
|                               |                                                         |                                |   |
|                               |                                                         |                                |   |

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


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                          291,482
<SECURITIES>                    1,148,049
<RECEIVABLES>                   335,324
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                2,172,228
<PP&E>                          1,128,885
<DEPRECIATION>                  (29,931)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  3,282,078
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           1,385,700
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     301,700
<COMMON>                        498,348
<OTHER-SE>                      (875,342)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    3,282,078
<SALES>                         152,761
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                152,761
<CGS>                           157,103
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   157,103
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                330,554
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              5,036
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (339,932)
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (339,932)
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    (339,932)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                   (.01)
        



</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6506

MARRIS JERMAINE WILSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus NORA HUNT, Superintendent, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (1:05-cv-00270-JAB) Submitted: July 20, 2006 Decided: July 27, 2006 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marris Jermaine Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, Alvin William Keller, Jr., NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Marris Jermaine Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Wilson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.1
 
 
 
 CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Weingarten Realty Investors (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Andrew M. Alexander, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 1.  The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 2.  The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 
 BY:
              /s/
      Andrew M. AlexanderAndrew
      M. AlexanderPresident/Chief
      Executive OfficerNovember
      7, 2008
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 40860 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JESUS CARRILLO

- RODRIGUEZ , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:18

- CR

- 817

- 1

Before OWEN , GRAVES, and OLDHAM , Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jesus Carrillo

Rodriguez 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). Carrillo

- Rodriguez h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no

* 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 May 2, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-40860 Document: 00514940904 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/02/2019No. 18

- 40860

2 nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leav e to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 18-40860 Document: 00514940904 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/02/2019
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2486

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on octadecyl isocyanate.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 22, 1993

Mr. RAMSTAD introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on octadecyl

isocyanate.

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

3 SECTION 1. OCTADECYL ISOCYANATE.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.30.70 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended

6 by striking ‘‘12/31/92’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/95’’.

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—

8 (1) IN GENERAL.—The amendment made by

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered,

10 or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on
2

•HR 2486 IH

1 or after the 15th day after the date of the enact2 ment of this Act.

3 (2) RETROACTIVE APPLICATION TO CERTAIN

4 ENTRIES.—Notwithstanding section 514 of the Tar5 iff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514) or any other provi6 sion of law, upon a request filed with the appro7 priate customs officer before the date that is 90

8 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, any

9 entry, or withdrawal from warehouse for consump10 tion, of any goods described in heading 9902.30.70

11 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United

12 States that was made—

13 (A) after December 31, 1992, and

14 (B) before the date that is 15 days after

15 the date of the enactment of this Act,

16 shall be liquidated or reliquidated as though such

17 entry or withdrawal occurred on the date that is 15

18 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
[No. 35350-4-II.

Division Two.

September 25, 2007.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Shajuanda Simone Tate, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 06-1-02151-9, Waldo F. Stone, J. Pro Tern., entered September 8, 2006. *Affirmed in part, reversed in part,*and *remanded*by unpublished opinion per Hunt, J., concurred in by Armstrong and Quinn-Brintnall, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S DECEMBER 31, 1996 CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           2,628
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,857
<ALLOWANCES>                                       380
<INVENTORY>                                      8,698
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,766
<PP&E>                                          61,278
<DEPRECIATION>                                  15,956
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  74,203
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,313
<BONDS>                                          7,281
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             5
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,035
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    74,203
<SALES>                                         59,445
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                59,445
<CGS>                                           39,885
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   39,885
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,839
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,164
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,670
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,921
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,749
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,749
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.25


</TABLE>
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-30376 Summary Calendar

TERRY MELVIN JACKSON, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus JAMES LEBLANC, Warden; RICHARD IEYOUB, Attorney General State of Louisiana, Respondents-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 96-CV-3175-E

- - - - - - - - - - November 19, 1997 Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Terry Melvin Jackson, Louisiana prisoner #120416, appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing his habeas corpus petition as procedurally barred. Jackson argues that the district court’s dismissal was in error because he had shown cause for his procedural default in the state court and resulting prejudice. We have reviewed the record and the briefs filed by the parties, and we AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal for essentially the same reason adopted by the district court. SeeNo. 97-30376 -2- Jackson v. LeBlanc , No. 96-3175 (E.D. La. Mar. 26, 1997). Jackson’s motions for the appointment of counsel and for the production of documents are DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                              5
       
<S>                                    <C>                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          3-MOS                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1999                DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                         JAN-01-1999                JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                           MAR-31-1999                DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                 0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<SECURITIES>                           0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                          0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                           0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<INVENTORY>                            0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                       0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<PP&E>                                 0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                         0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<BONDS>                                0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<COMMON>                               0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<PREFERRED>                            0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<OTHER-SE>                             0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           0 <F1>                     0 <F1>
<SALES>                                0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                       0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<CGS>                                  0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                          0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                       0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<INCOME-TAX>                           0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<DISCONTINUED>                         0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<EXTRAORDINARY>                        0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<CHANGES>                              0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<NET-INCOME>                           0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<EPS-PRIMARY>                          0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                          0 <F2>                     0 <F1>
        

<FN>
<F1>  See March 31, 1999 Statement of Net Assets in Liquidation.
<F2>  See March 31, 1999 Statement of Changes in Net Assets in Liquidation.
</FN>



</TABLE>
#### Gurmail Singh SANDAL, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 05-75226.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 20, 2007 *.

Filed Feb. 23, 2007.

Louis A. Gordon, Esq., Law Offices of Louis A. Gordon, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Regina Byrd, Esq. DOJ-U.S. Department *573of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: BEEZER, FERNANDEZ, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Gurmail Singh Sandal, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) 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. Where, as here, the BIA affirms without opinion, we review the IJ’s decision directly. *See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft,*350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003). We review for substantial evidence and will reverse only if the record compels a contrary conclusion. *See Gu v. Gonzales,*454 F.3d 1014, 1018 (9th Cir.2006). We deny the petition for review.

Sandal’s due process claim regarding a three-judge BIA panel, and his due process challenge to the streamlining process are foreclosed by *Falcon Carriche,*350 F.3d at 850-51.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that Sandal did not establish past persecution because the harm he suffered did not rise to the level of persecution. *See Gu,*454 F.3d at 1020. Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s conclusion that Sandal does not have a well-founded fear of future persecution. *See Molina-Estrada v. INS,*293 F.3d 1089, 1096 (9th Cir.2002).

Because Sandal failed to demonstrate that he was eligible for asylum, it follows he did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. *See Alvarez-Santos v. INS,*332 F.3d 1245, 1255 (9th Cir.2003).

Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s conclusion that Sandal failed to show that it was more likely than not that he will be tortured if returned to India. *See Malhi v. INS,*336 F.3d 989, 993 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 37 (Friday, February 23, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 11300]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-4452]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), 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 Hear, Lung, and Blood Institute 
Special Emphasis Panel. ZHL-1-CSR-J-M4, Reference Laboratory to 
Evaluate therapies for SCD Applications.
    Date: March 15, 2001.
    Time: 2 p.m. to 4 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: NIH, Rockledge II, Bethesda, MD 20892; (Telephone 
Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Robert B. Moore, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Review Branch, Room 7192, Division of Extramural 
Affairs, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National 
Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301/435-3541.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, 
National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and 
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, 
Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of 
Health, HHS)

    Dated: February 14, 2001.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 01-4452 Filed 2-22-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Royal BodyCare, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Clinton H. Howard, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company does hereby
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:



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



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



/s/ Clinton H. HowardClinton H. HowardChairman of the Board and Chief Executive OfficerMay 12, 2006