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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
FORM 10QSB - CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF EARNINGS (LOSS) FOR THE NINE MONTH PERIOD
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                 DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                    JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                      SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                                 58,961
<SECURITIES>                                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          94,603
<ALLOWANCES>                                                0
<INVENTORY>                                            12,784
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      641,668
<PP&E>                                                 68,897
<DEPRECIATION>                                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      1,626,523
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 371,097
<BONDS>                                                     0
<COMMON>                                                7,055
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                          1,255,426
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        1,626,523
<SALES>                                                39,082
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       39,082
<CGS>                                                   6,277
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           6,277
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      332,275
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        418
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      (299,151)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  (299,151)
<DISCONTINUED>                                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                         (299,151)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0.00
        

</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

June 23, 2009 

s0615 

Order 

 

June 23, 2009 

137944 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137944 

 COA: 284417 

Oakland CC: 89-090921-FC 

MONTY L. MATTHEWS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 3, 2008 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief
Financial Officer of Brookstone, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify that to the undersigneds knowledge:



| | 1) | the Companys Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended May 1, 2004 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 Companys Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended May 1, 2004 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Philip W. RoizinPhilip W. RoizinExecutive Vice President, Financeand Administration, Treasurer andSecretary and Chief Financial Officer




Dated: June 10, 2004
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Carlos GALVAN-LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13-31121

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 6, 2014.

Carol Mignonne Griffing, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Seth David Reeg, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Betty Lee Marak, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Shreveport, LA, for Defendant-App ellant.

Carlos Galvan-Lopez, Washington, MS, pro se.

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Carlos Galvan-Lopez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Gal-van-Lopez has 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 nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2339

To amend the Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities

Act of 1988 to authorize appropriations for each of the fiscal years

1994 through 1998.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 8, 1993

Mr. OWENS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Education and Labor

A BILL

To amend the Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals

with Disabilities Act of 1988 to authorize appropriations

for each of the fiscal years 1994 through 1998.

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

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS.

4 (a) GRANTS TO STATES.—Section 106(a) of the

5 Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Dis6 abilities Act of 1988 (29 U.S.C. 2216(a)) is amended—

7 (1) by striking ‘‘1989 and’’ and inserting

8 ‘‘1989,’’; and
2

•HR 2339 IH

1 (2) by inserting before the period the following:

2 ‘‘, and such sums as may be necessary for each suc3 ceeding fiscal year ending before October 1, 1998’’.

4 (b) PROGRAMS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE.—Sec5 tion 241 of the Technology-Related Assistance for Individ6 uals with Disabilities Act of 1988 (29 U.S.C. 2271) is

7 amended—

8 (1) in subsection (a)—

9 (A) by striking ‘‘1989 and’’ and inserting

10 ‘‘1989,’’, and

11 (B) by inserting before the period the fol12 lowing: ‘‘, and such sums as may be necessary

13 for each of the fiscal years 1994, 1995, 1996,

14 1997, and 1998’’; and

15 (2) in subsection (b)—

16 (A) by striking ‘‘1989 and’’ and inserting

17 ‘‘1989,’’, and

18 (B) by inserting before the period the fol19 lowing: ‘‘, and such sums as may be necessary

20 for each of the fiscal years 1994, 1995, 1996,

21 1997, and 1998’’.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 36 (Thursday, February 22, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11170-11171]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-4338]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Federal Open Market Committee; Domestic Policy Directive of 
December 19, 2000

    In accordance with Sec. 71.5 of its rules regarding availability of 
information (12 CFR part 271), there is set forth below the domestic 
policy directive issued by the Federal Open Market Committee at its 
meeting held on December 19, 2000.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Copies of the Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee 
meeting of December 19, 2000, which include the domestic policy 
directive issued at that meeting, are available upon request to the 
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, D.C. 
20551. The minutes are published in the Federal Reserve Bulletin and 
in the Board's annual report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Federal Open Market Committee seeks monetary and financial 
conditions that will foster price stability and promote sustainable 
growth in output. To further its long-run objectives, the Committee in 
the immediate future seeks conditions in reserve markets consistent 
with maintaining the federal funds rate to an average of around 6-1/2 
percent.

[[Page 11171]]

    By order of the Federal Open Market Committee, February 2, 2001.

Donald L. Kohn,
Secretary, Federal Open Market Committee.
[FR Doc. 01-4338 Field 2-21-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
Exhibit
      10.3

     

    JOINDER
      AGREEMENT

    


    Joinder
      Agreement, dated as of the 13th
      day of
      June, 2006, by and between Solomon Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation
      (the “Debtor”),
      and
      the undersigned (the “Investor”).

    


    Reference
      is made to that certain Amended and Restated Security Agreement, dated as of
      March 16, 2005, by and among the Debtor, Woodlaken LLC, Jezebel Management
      Corporation and the other investors listed on Schedule
      A
      thereto
      (the “Security
      Agreement”).
      Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings
      ascribed thereto in the Security Agreement.

    


    Investor
      has purchased Senior Secured Promissory Note(s) of the Debtor in the aggregate
      principal amount of $25,000.00 from the Debtor. As a condition to permitting
      the
      Investor to share in the security interest in the Debtor’s assets described in
      the Security Agreement, the Debtor has required that the Investor execute this
      Joinder Agreement for the purpose of binding the Investor to the Security
      Agreement. 

    


    With
      the
      execution of this Joinder Agreement by the Investor, (i) the Investor hereby
      agrees to be bound by the terms of the Security Agreement as if the Investor
      was
      an original signatory to such agreement, (ii) the Investor shall be deemed
      to be
      a “Secured Party” under such agreement, and (iii) the Senior Secured Promissory
      Note(s) purchased by the Investor shall be deemed to be a “Note” under such
      agreement.

    


    IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Joinder Agreement as
      of
      the date first above written.

    
      	 	 	 
	 	
              DEBTOR:

               

              SOLOMON
                TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

            
	 
 	 
 	 
 
	 	By:  	/s/
              Peter W. DeVecchis, Jr. 
	 	
              
                

              

              Name:
                Peter W. DeVecchis, Jr.

              Title:
                President

            




    
      	 	 	 
	 	
              INVESTOR:

            
	 
 	 
 	 
 
	 	       
              	/s/
              Steven Kilponen
	 	
              
                

              

              Steven
                Kilponen
MICHAEL A. JENKINS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-0634

_____________________________/

Opinion filed July 6, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Brad Stetson, Judge.

Michael A. Jenkins, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, BILBREY, and WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR.
#### In re Mark C. JACKSON, Petitioner.

No. 2014-142. .

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Aug. 5, 2014.

Before REYNA, BRYSON, and TARANTO, Circuit Judges.

ON MOTION

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Mark C. Jackson petitions for a writ of mandamus relating to his complaint brought before the United States Court of Federal Claims.

On July 23, 2014, Jackson filed a notice of appeal, docketed as 2014-5121, from the judgment of the Court of Federal Claims dismissing his complaint for lack of jurisdiction. A party who seeks a writ bears the burden of proving that he has no other means of obtaining the relief desired. *Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Court,*490 U.S. 296, 309, 109 S.Ct. 1814, 104 L.Ed.2d 318 (1989). Because Jackson may raise arguments concerning his case in his appeal, mandamus relief is not appropriate.

Accordingly,

It Is Ordered That:

(1) The petition for a writ of mandamus is denied.

(2) All pending motions are denied as moot.
<PAGE>
 
                                  Exhibit 21

                          Subsidiaries of Registrant
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 21

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
                         ------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
 
 
                                                      Percent       State of
                                                         of       Incorporation
          Parent                   Subsidiary        Ownership   or Organization
---------------------------  ----------------------  ----------  ---------------
<S>                          <C>                     <C>         <C>
 
GFS Bancorp, Inc.            Grinnell Federal           100%         Federal
                               Savings Bank
 
Grinnell Federal Savings     Grinnell Service           100%         Iowa
   Bank                        Corporation, Inc.
</TABLE>
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 June 30, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Clinton H. Howard, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
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, 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. Howard Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer August 14, 2003




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section
906, has been provided to Royal BodyCare, Inc. and will be retained by Royal BodyCare, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNITED STATES
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                               WASHINGTON DC 20549

                                    FORM 10-Q/A

/X/      QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
         EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended        March 31, 2003
                               -------------------------------------------------

                                       OR

/ /      TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
         EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from                       to
                               ---------------------    ------------------------

Commission File Number       1-9887
                       --------------------

                            OREGON STEEL MILLS, INC.
             (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

                   Delaware                                  94-0506370
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         (State or other jurisdiction of                   (IRS Employer
          incorporation or organization)                    Identification No.)

 1000 S.W. Broadway, Suite 2200, Portland, Oregon                       97205
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Address of principal executive offices)                              (Zip Code)

                                 (503)223-9228
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   (Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since
    last report)

         Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Sections 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such
filing requirements for the past 90 days.

                                    Yes X    No
                                       ---     ---

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer
(as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
                                    Yes X    No
                                       ---     ---

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes of
common stock, as of the latest practical date:

         Common Stock, $.01 Par Value                  26,388,254
         ----------------------------        -----------------------------------
                    Class                      Number of Shares Outstanding
                                                  (as of May 1, 2003)
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*WILLIAM TOCCO

*Kevin Murray Smith,*in support of the petition.

*Nancy L. Chupak,*senior assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided June 24, 2010

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 120 Conn. App. 768 (AC 30287), is denied.
Order entered September 19, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-00983-CV

FRIEDMAN & FEIGER, L.L.P., Appellant

V.

DEION L. SANDERS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 366-02996-2016

ORDER

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.5(c), we ORDER Collin County 

District Clerk Lynne Finley to file, no later than September 23, 2016, a supplemental clerk’s 

record containing a copy of the trial court’s July 29, 2016 temporary injunction. To allow 

appellant an opportunity to cite to the supplemental clerk’s record in its brief, we extend the 

deadline to file appellant’s brief on our own motion and ORDER the brief be filed no later than 

September 30, 2016.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
#### Richard E. ROBINSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Harold CLARKE, Director of the Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 13-7983.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 17, 2014.

Decided: April 21, 2014.

Richard E. Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Alice Theresa Armstrong, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Richard E. Robinson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appeal-ability. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of appealability will *182not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(2) (2012). 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 petition 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 Robinson 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*