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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF AMERICAN SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING,
INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,514
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,918
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      9,474
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,196
<PP&E>                                           4,768
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,447
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  29,547
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,500
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            3,220
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      15,294
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    29,547
<SALES>                                         42,267
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                42,267
<CGS>                                           28,098
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   39,389
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    51
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,827
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,130
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,697
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,697
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.35
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.33
        

</TABLE>
#### IN THE MATTER OF FRANK E. STEVENSON, JR.

(Supreme Court Disciplinary No. 726)

(387 SE2d 895)

Decided December 5, 1989.

*William P. Smith III, General Counsel State Bar, Joe David Jackson, Assistant General Counsel State Bar,*for State Bar of Georgia.

Per curiam.

Respondent Frank E. Stevenson, Jr., has petitioned for voluntary surrender of his license to practice law in the State of Georgia. His petition is based upon his admissions of fact and conduct in violation of Standard No. 66 of State Bar of Georgia Rule 4-102.

Respondent, in his petition, requests that this Court accept his voluntary surrender of his license to practice law.

In light of the above and in view of the recommendation of the Review Panel of the State Bar Disciplinary Board that Respondent be allowed to surrender his license to practice law, it is directed that he be allowed to surrender his license. Before any reinstatement petition is granted, he must comply with the reinstatement rules of the State Bar of Georgia in effect at such time.

Application for voluntary surrender of license is granted.

*All the Justices concur.*
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**MOSSIMO, INC.**

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

I, Mossimo Giannulli, Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer ofthe registrant, certify that:

1.                 I have reviewed this annual reporton Form 10-K of Mossimo, Inc.;

2.                 Based on my knowledge, this reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report.

3.                 Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

4.                 The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)          Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant is made known to usby others, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

(b)         Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)          Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonable likely to affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.                 The registrant’s other certifyingofficer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrols over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

(a)          All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

(b)         Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.
| /s/ MOSSIMO GIANNULLI                     |
|-------------------------------------------|
| Mossimo Giannulli                         |
| *Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer* |
| March 31, 2006                       |

 

----
413P15

#### Christopher W. Abells v. Tiffany J. Martin (formerly Abells)

1. Def’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA16-88)

1. Denied

2. Def’s Conditional Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*to Review Decision of COA

2. Denied
§ 302-7.108 What temporary storage expenses will be reimbursed? The following will be reimbursed: ( a ) Reimbursable temporary storage cost incident to storage at the HHG carriers facility are: ( 1 ) Handling in;
( 2 ) Daily storage;
( 3 ) Handling out; and
( 4 ) Drayage to residence.
( b ) Reimbursable cost of storage at a self storage facility. This is the cost of the storage space that will reasonably accommodate the HHG transported.
Order entered November 20, 2017

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-17-01221-CV

THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER, Appellant

V.

CHARLES WAYNE TAYLOR AND ROSEMARY TAYLOR, Appellees

On Appeal from the 14th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-08022

ORDER

Before the court is appellant’s November 15, 2017 unopposed motion to extend time to 

file appellant’s brief in this accelerated appeal. We GRANT the motion and ORDER appellant’s 

brief filed on or before December 15, 2017.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-40851 Conference Calendar

JOE LOUIS BOOKER, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus TOM WORSHAM; KELLY STEPHENS; JERRY WIGGINS; L.E. JACK DRISCOLL, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:96-CV-188

- - - - - - - - - - December 10, 1996 Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Joe Louis Booker, Texas prisoner # 515451, appeals from the judgment of the district court dismissing a civil rights action, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as frivolous. We have reviewed the record and the brief and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing as frivolous Booker’s claim that he was deprived of due process before hisNo. 96-40851 - 2 - confinement in administrative segregation. Booker v. Worsham et al. , No. 4:96-CV-188 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 12, 1996). The motions to amend the complaint and for a temporary restraining order and an injunction are not properly before the court, and they are DENIED. The appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2. We caution Booker that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Booker is further cautioned to review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous. APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTIONS DENIED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
# Comments on: 18-2338: NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY [OPINION], Precedential
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

#### § 1.2101 Purpose.

The provisions of §§ 1.2101 through 1.2115 implement section 309(j) of the Communications Act of 1934, as added by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (Pub. L. 103-66) and subsequent amendments.

[84 FR 1630, Feb. 5, 2019]
```

[Federal Register: July 20, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 138)]
[Notices]               
[Page 42080-42081]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20jy10-41]                         

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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

 
Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``CFTC'').

ACTION: Notice of Meeting of Agricultural Advisory Committee.

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

SUMMARY: The CFTC's Agricultural Advisory Committee will hold a public 
meeting on August 5, 2010, from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m., at the Commission's 
Washington, DC headquarters. The agenda for the meeting includes (1) 
the ICE Futures US Cotton Contract, (2) wheat price convergence issues, 
and (3) price reporting issues in the cattle and hog markets. Members 
of the public may file written statements with the committee. If time 
permits, reasonable provision will be made for oral presentations by 
members of the public of up to five minutes.

DATES: The meeting will be held on August 5, 2010 from 9 a.m. to 1 
p.m.. Members of the public who wish to make oral statements should 
inform Commissioner Michael V. Dunn, who chairs the committee, in 
writing at least three business days before the meeting.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place in the first floor hearing room 
at the Commission's headquarters, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581. Written statements and requests to 
make oral statements should be sent to the attention of Agricultural 
Advisory Committee, c/o Chairman Michael V. Dunn, Commodity Futures 
Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20581.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicole McNair at (202) 418-5070.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting will be webcast on the 
Commission's Web site, http://www.cftc.gov. Members of the public also 
can listen to the meeting by telephone. The public access call-in 
numbers will be announced at a later date.

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. app. 2 Sec.  10(a)(2) .

    Dated: July 14, 2010.

[[Page 42081]]

    By the Commission.
David A. Stawick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-17605 Filed 7-19-10; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE P
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ANACOMP
INC'S MARCH 31, 1999 FORM 10-Q QUARTERLY REPORT AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         47,614
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  71,980
<ALLOWANCES>                                   5,954
<INVENTORY>                                    17,884
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               140,563
<PP&E>                                         92,790
<DEPRECIATION>                                 48,191
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 349,709
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          105,426
<BONDS>                                        339,765
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       142
<OTHER-SE>                                     (95,624)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   349,709
<SALES>                                        113,740
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               333,157
<CGS>                                          71,862
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  344,067
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             30,396
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (40,617)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   5,194
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (45,811)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 3,865
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (41,946)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (2.94)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (2.94)



</TABLE>
#### § 51-8.9 Preservation of Records.

The Committee will preserve all correspondence pertaining to the requests it receives under this subpart, as well as copies of all requested records, until disposition or destruction is authorized pursuant to Title 44 of the United States Code or the General Records Schedule 4.2 of the National Archives and Records Administration. Records will not be destroyed while they are the subject of a pending request, appeal, or lawsuit under the Act.
#### § 102-77.10 What definition applies to this part?

*Visual art* means works, including, but not limited to, painting, sculpture, architectural or environmental art, time-based media, and works on paper.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

FANTASIA TRADING LLC, DBA ANKERDIRECT,

Appellant

v.

COGNIPOWER, LLC,

Appellee

______________________ 

2022-2008, 2022-2010

______________________ 

Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. IPR2021-

00067, IPR2021-00071.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

FRANK SCHERKENBACH, Fish & Richardson P.C., Boston, MA, argued for appellant. Also represented by BRIAN 

P. BOYD, Atlanta, GA; MICHAEL R. HEADLEY, Redwood City, 

CA; JOHN WINSTON THORNBURGH, San Diego, CA; HOWARD 

G. POLLACK, Power Integrations, San Jose, CA. 

 PHILIP J. WARRICK, Irell & Manella LLP, Washington, 

DC, argued for appellee. Also represented by JASON 

SHEASBY, Los Angeles, CA; JONATHAN M. LINDSAY, Newport Beach, CA.

Case: 22-2008 Document: 58 Page: 1 Filed: 02/09/2024
 ______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (MOORE, Chief Judge, STOLL and 

BENCIVENGO, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

February 9, 2024

Date

Case: 22-2008 Document: 58 Page: 2 Filed: 02/09/2024
§ 60-30.6 Answer. ( a ) *Filing and service.* Within 20 days after the service of the complaint, the defendant shall file an answer with the Chief Administrative Law Judge if the case has not been assigned to an Administrative Law Judge. The answer shall be signed by the defendant or its attorney, and served on the Government in accordance with § 60-30.4(b).
( b ) *Contents; failure to file.* The answer shall ( 1 ) contain a statement of the facts which constitute the grounds of defense, and shall specifically admit, explain, or deny, each of the allegations of the complaint unless the defendant is without knowledge, in which case the answer shall so state; or
( 2 ) state that the defendant admits all the allegations of the complaint. The answer may contain a waiver of hearing; and if not, a separate paragraph in the answer shall request a hearing. The answer shall contain the name and address of the defendant, or of the attorney representing the defendant. Failure to file an answer or to plead specifically to any allegation of the complaint shall constitute an admission of such allegation.
( c ) *Procedure, upon admission of facts.* The admission, in the answer or by failure to file an answer, of all the material allegations of fact contained in the complaint shall constitute a waiver of hearing. Upon such admission, the Administrative Law Judge, without further hearing, may prepare his decision in which he shall adopt as his proposed findings of fact the material facts alleged in the complaint. The parties shall be given an opportunity to file exceptions to his decision and to file briefs in support of the exceptions.
S89G0141.

#### PAYNE v. BLACKWELL et al.

(384 SE2d 393)

Smith, Justice.

We granted a writ of certiorari in *Banks County School District v. Blackwell,*191 Ga. App. 790 (383 SE2d 159) (1989), and we reverse.

The appellant, Ms. Payne, was driving a Banks County School bus when it collided with a vehicle driven, by the appellee, Ms. Blackwell. The appellee filed a complaint against the appellant and the Banks County School District (School District) to recover for her injuries. The School District’s motion to dismiss for failure to comply with OCGA § 36-11-1 was denied and a jury returned a verdict in favor of the appellee.1

On appeal, the Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred in denying the School District’s motion to dismiss and reversed.

*484Decided October 19, 1989.

*Deal & Jarrard, J. Nathan Deal,*for appellant.

*W. Allan Myers, Robert J. Reed,*for appellees.

In the absence of an expression of legislative intent to apply the statute of limitation to actions against school districts, we refuse to allow OCGA § 36-11-1 to bar the appellee’s action. Our decision is based on the following. Art. IX, Sec. II, Par. IX of the Georgia Constitution of 1983 provides: “The General Assembly may waive the immunity of counties, municipalities, and school districts by law.” The General Assembly also has the power to enact specific statutes of limitation to bar actions filed after a specified time limit. Generally, all actions against counties must be presented within 12 months, OCGA § 36-11-1, and all actions against municipal corporations must be presented within six months, OCGA § 36-33-5. Our constitution treats counties, municipalities, and school districts as separate and distinct for the purpose of waiver, and the General Assembly has enacted specific bars to limit actions against counties and municipalities. However, the General Assembly has enacted no specific bar to limit actions against school districts. We, therefore, reverse the opinion of the Court of Appeals and hold that OCGA § 36-11-1 does not apply to school districts.

*Judgment*reversed.

*All the Justices concur.*

1

 OCGA § 36-11-1 provides, in pertinent part: “All claims against counties must be presented within 12 months after they accrue or become payable or the same are barred
§ 101.205 Operation during emergency. The licensee of any station in these services may, during a period of emergency in which normal communication facilities are disrupted as a result of hurricane, flood, earthquake, or similar disaster, utilize such station for emergency communication service in a manner other than that specified in the instrument of authorization: Provided: ( a ) That as soon as possible after the beginning of such emergency use, notice be sent to the Commission stating the nature of the emergency and the use to which the station is being put;
( b ) That the emergency use of the station must be discontinued as soon as substantially normal communication facilities are again available;
( c ) That the Commission must be notified immediately when such special use of the station is terminated;
( d ) That, in no event, will any station engage in emergency transmission on frequencies other than, or with power in excess of, that specified in the instrument of authorization or as otherwise expressly provided by the Commission, or by law; and
( e ) That the Commission may, at any time, order the discontinuance of any such emergency communication.
[61 FR 26677, May 28, 1996, as amended at 63 FR 68983, Dec. 14, 1998]
# Comments on: Notice of Extension of Access Restrictions for the National Courts Building
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

#### § 1.9048 Special provisions relating to spectrum leasing arrangements involving licensees in the Public Safety Radio Services.

Licensees in the Public Safety Radio Services (see part 90, subpart B, and § 90.311(a)(1)(i) of this chapter) may enter into spectrum leasing arrangements with other public safety entities eligible for such a license authorization as well as with entities providing communications in support of public safety operations (see § 90.523(b) of this chapter).

[86 FR 59869, Oct. 29, 2021]