alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 2- 10 37 1 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :1 0- cr-2 07 53 -PAS-2 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll an t, ve rs us EARL SILAS, JR., Defen da nt -Ap pe ll ee.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal s fr om

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof F lo rid a __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Feb ru ary 5, 2 01 3) Befo re TJ OFLAT, MARTIN andBLACK, Cir cu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM:

Case: 12-10371 Date Filed: 02/05/2013 Page: 1 of 3The Gov ern m en t ap pe al s t he di st ric t co urt’s re se nt en ci ng of Ear l Si la s, J r.,

pu rs ua ntto Fed eral Ru le of C riminal Pro cedur e 3 5( a). The Gov ern m en t ar gu es th e d is tri ctco urt l ack edjuri sd ic ti on to res en te nc e Si la s b ecau se th e res en te nc in g was co nduc te d m or e th an14 da y s af te r th e o rig in al ora l s en te nc e was anno un ced . Und er Ru le 35 , “ [w]ith in 14 da y s af te r se nt en ci ng , th e co urt m ay co rrec t a se nt en ce tha t re su lt edfro m ari th m et ic al , tec hn ic al , or o th er cl ear e rro r.” Fed . R. Cri m . P. 35 (a). Th e wor d s en te nc in g “ m ean s t he ora l an no un cem en t o f th e se nt en ce.” Fe d. R. C rim. P. 35 (c). We hav e h el d t ha t t he ti m e li m itof Rul e 3 5( a) is juri sd ic ti on al an d t ha t an y m od ifi cat io n o ut si de of tha t t im e li m itis a “ le ga l nu ll it y .” Uni te d Sta tes v. Ph il li ps , 59 7 F .3d11 90 , 11 96 -9 7 (1 1t h C ir. 2 01 0) (ci ti ng Uni te d Sta tes v. Di az -Cl ark, 29 2 F .3d13 10 , 13 19 (11 th Cir . 20 02 ). If a se nt en ce i s v acat edwithi n t he ti m e li m it , bu t a n ew se nt en ce i s n otim po se d b efo re th e ti m e li m itex pi res , th e o rd er “ va cat in g t he in it ia l s en te nc e wit he r[s ] an d i s o f no effe ct .” Uni te d Sta tes v. Mo rr is on , 20 4 F .3d10 91 , 10 94 (11 Cir . 20 04 ). th As co nc ed edby Sila s, t he di st ric t co urt l ack edjuri sd ic ti on to en te r th e am en de d o rd er. Phi ll ip s , 59 7 F .3dat 1 19 6- 97 . W e are requi redto co ns id er the di st ric t co urt’s jur is di ct io n su a s po nt e , se e Uni te d Sta tes v. Str au b , 50 8 F .3d10 03 , 10 08 (11 th Cir . 20 07 ), bu t ev enwere we t o l oo k fo r in vi te d e rro r, we wou ldfin d no ne be cau se th e Gov ern m en t o bjec te d t o t he Ru le 35 (a) h eari ng an d d idno t i nv it e 2 Case: 12-10371 Date Filed: 02/05/2013 Page: 2 of 3an y

subs eque nterro r be cau se itne ve r acqui es cedor a gr eedto th e la ckof juri sd ic ti on at r es en te nc in g. Mo reo ve r, we ha ve sp eci fic al ly saidth e fai lu re t o rai se th e Ru le 35 (a) t im e li m itdo es no t wai ve th e is su e o n app eal . Mor riso n , 20 4 F.3 d 1 09 3. Acco rd in gl y , th e d is tri ctco urt l ack edjuri sd ic ti on to en te r th e am en de d se nt en ce o f im

pr is on m en t. VACATED AND REMANDED.

3 Case: 12-10371 Date Filed: 02/05/2013 Page: 3 of 3
46674.

#### LEDFORD v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY.

(386 SE2d 662)

Decided November 9, 1989.

*Wesley Williams,*for appellant.

*W. Allan Myers,*for appellee.

Bell, Justice.

We granted certiorari to consider whether the opinion of the Court of Appeals, *Ledford v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.,*189 Ga. App. 866 (377 SE2d 693) (1989), was in conflict with the opinion of the Court of Appeals in *Brown v. Phillips,*178 Ga. App. 316 (1) (342 SE2d 786) (1986), regarding application of the doctrine of in loco parentis.

After careful consideration, we conclude that the two opinions are not in conflict, and hereby affirm the judgment in *Ledford.*

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
No. 11-9519.

#### Vanderwerff *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
•"i-:ARTMENTOF 

. ''iSPORWION 

'•-:r OPERATIONS 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON,D.C. ^H Mf; IB P h UO 

IN THE MATTER OF 

DARBY AVIATION, INC. 

Civil Penalty Action 

FAA Docket No. CP08SO0026 

FAA Case No. 2008SO090020 

DMS NO. FAA-2008-1192 

Before the Decisionmaker 

WITHDRAWAL OF AGENCY'S APPEAL 

COMES NOW the Agency (Appellant, and herein the Agency) and in accordance 

with section 13.233 of the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty Actions (14 CFR 

§13.233) withdraws its appeal of Administrative Law Judge Isaac D. Benkin's Order served 

June 3,2010. 

Respectfully submitted. 

CYMOND VEATC H 

Attorney 

Office of the Regional Counsel 

January 12,2011. 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a copy of this document has been served this date by e-mail and 

regular mail to: 

Deanna L. Weidner, Esq. 

Anderson & Weidner, LLC 

595 N. 20* Street, Suite 1450 

Birmingham, AL 35203 

e-mail to: DLWeidner@davidbandersonlaw.com, 

DBAnderson@davidbandersonlaw.com, MDawson@davidbandersonlaw.com 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Room 2014 

e-mail to: stephanie.mcdain@faa.gov and vicki.leemon@faa.gov 

'RAYMOND VEATCH 

Attorney 

date
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
    <ARTICLE>         5
    <LEGEND>
    This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
    consolidated statement of financial condition at June 30, 1998
    (unaudited) and the consolidated statement of income for the six 
    months ended June 30, 1998 (unaudited) and is qualified in its
    entirety by reference to such financial statements.
    </LEGEND>
    <MULTIPLIER>      1
                      
    <S>                         <C>        <C>
    <PERIOD-TYPE>               6-MOS
    <FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       Dec-31-1997
    <PERIOD-START>                          Jan-01-1998
    <PERIOD-END>                            Jun-30-1998
    <CASH>                                      122,886
    <SECURITIES>                                    -0-
    <RECEIVABLES>                                   -0-
    <ALLOWANCES>                                    -0-
    <INVENTORY>                                     -0-
    <CURRENT-ASSETS>                            122,886
    <PP&E>                                          -0-
    <DEPRECIATION>                                  -0-
    <TOTAL-ASSETS>                              213,951
    <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           -0-
    <BONDS>                                         -0-
    <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           -0-
    <PREFERRED>                                     -0-
    <COMMON>                                    314,080
    <OTHER-SE>                                 <100,129>
    <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                213,951
    <SALES>                                         -0-
    <TOTAL-REVENUES>                            115,916
    <CGS>                                           -0-
    <TOTAL-COSTS>                                   -0-
    <OTHER-EXPENSES>                            148,426
    <LOSS-PROVISION>                                -0-
    <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              -0-
    <INCOME-PRETAX>                                 -0-
    <INCOME-TAX>                                    -0-
    <INCOME-CONTINUING>                             -0-
    <DISCONTINUED>                              <32,510>
    <EXTRAORDINARY>                                 -0-
    <CHANGES>                                       -0-
    <NET-INCOME>                                <32,510>
    <EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.00
    <EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.00
                                                   
    
</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

					NO. 2-03-496-CR

GARY RAY KINSON								APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

	----------

	FROM THE 355TH DISTRICT COURT OF HOOD COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	We have considered “Appellant's Motion To Withdraw Notice Of Appeal And Dismiss Appeal.”  The motion complies with rule 42.2(a) of the rules of appellate procedure.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  No decision of this court having been delivered before we received this motion, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal.  See id.; Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:	CAYCE, C.J.; LIVINGSTON and DAUPHINOT, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: April 29, 2004
No. 11-9077.

#### Ponce *v.*Texas.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 431

To prohibit discrimination on account of sexual orientation.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 5, 1993

Mr. WAXMAN (for himself, Mr. EDWARDS of California, Mrs. SCHROEDER, Mr.

STUDDS, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, and Mr. NADLER) introduced the

following bill; which was referred jointly to the Committees on the Judiciary and Education and Labor

JUNE 9, 1994

Additional sponsors: Mr. ACKERMAN, Mr. BEILENSON, Mr. BERMAN, Mr.

BLACKWELL, Mr. BROWN of California, Mr. CLAY, Mr. GEJDENSON, Mr.

GONZALEZ, Mr. MATSUI, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. MILLER of California,

Mr. MINETA, Mrs. MORELLA, Mr. PASTOR, Ms. PELOSI, Mr. SCHUMER,

Mr. SHAYS, Mr. STARK, Mrs. UNSOELD, Mr. VENTO, Mr. WHEAT, Mr.

YATES, Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mr. OLVER, Mr. SABO, Mr. BONIOR, Miss COLLINS of Michigan, Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr. SANDERS, Ms. WOOLSEY, Mrs.

MALONEY, Mr. FOGLIETTA, Mr. JOHNSTON of Florida, Ms. ESHOO, Mr.

FAZIO, Mr. LANTOS, Mr. MEEHAN, Mr. DELLUMS, Mrs. KENNELLY, Mr.

EVANS, Mr. ANDREWS of Maine, Mr. TORRICELLI, Mr. KREIDLER, Mr.

DEUTSCH, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. JEFFERSON, Mr. FORD of Michigan, Mr.

WYDEN, Mrs. LOWEY, Ms. NORTON, Mrs. MINK, Mr. DIXON, Mr. MARTINEZ, Mr. RICHARDSON, Mr. SERRANO, Mr. HASTINGS, Ms. CANTWELL,

Ms. MARGOLIES-MEZVINSKY, Mr. HOCHBRUECKNER, Ms. DELAURO, Mr.

HINCHEY, Ms. SCHENK, Mr. WYNN, Mr. MACHTLEY, Ms. VELA ́ZQUEZ,

Mr. OWENS, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. FILNER, Mr. REED, and Mr. BECERRA

A BILL

To prohibit discrimination on account of sexual orientation.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 431 SC

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Civil Rights Act of

3 1993’’.

4 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION.

5 It shall be unlawful to discriminate against any per6 son—

7 (1) in employment, education, credit, or hous8 ing;

9 (2) in the sale or use of goods or services;

10 (3) with respect to any public facility; or

11 (4) in any federally assisted program or

12 activity;

13 on account of that person’s sexual orientation, actual or

14 perceived.

Æ
#### § 51-6.14 Replacement services.

If a service is on the Procurement List to meet the needs of a Government entity at a specific location and the entity moves to another location, the service at the new location is automatically considered to be on the Procurement List if a qualified nonprofit agency is available to provide the service at the new location, unless the service at that location is already being provided by another contractor. If the service at the new location is being provided by another contractor, the service will not be on the Procurement List unless the Committee adds it as prescribed in part 51-2 of this chapter. If another Government entity moves into the old location, the service at that location will remain on the Procurement List to meet the needs of the new Government entity.

[63 FR 16439, Apr. 3, 1998]
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"20-1424: COREPHOTONICS, LTD. v. APPLE INC. [OPINION], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"6dvTgzAYYF\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/10-25-2021-20-1424-corephotonics-ltd-v-apple-inc-opinion-20-1424-opinion-10-25-2021_1854367\/\">20-1424: COREPHOTONICS, LTD. v. APPLE INC. [OPINION], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/10-25-2021-20-1424-corephotonics-ltd-v-apple-inc-opinion-20-1424-opinion-10-25-2021_1854367\/embed\/#?secret=6dvTgzAYYF\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“20-1424: COREPHOTONICS, LTD. v. APPLE INC. [OPINION], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"6dvTgzAYYF\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"OPINION posted: COREPHOTONICS, LTD. v. APPLE INC. [OPINION](pdf) Appeal Number: 20-1424 Origin: PTO Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
3. AEATF Removal Efficiency Study Protocol 

a. EPA Science and Ethics Review

b. AEATF Volume 1: Transmittal Letter, Checklist

c. AEATF Volume 2: Protocol, IRB Conditional Approval Letter, Supporting Documents

d. AEATF Volume 3: IRB Review Records

e. AEATF Volume 4: AEATF-II SOPs cited in the protocol

f. Schulman Associates IRB Standard Operating Procedures

g. Charge Questions
#### § 301-10.265 Will my travel on Government aircraft be reported?

Your travel on Government aircraft will not be reported unless you are a senior Federal official, or a non-Federal traveler. (Travel under 10 U.S.C. 2648 is not reported.) If you are a senior Federal official or a non-Federal traveler, any use you make of Government aircraft, *i.e.,* as a passenger, crewmember, or qualified non-crewmember, will be reported to the General Services Administration (GSA) by the agency that owns or hires the Government aircraft. (Agencies must maintain information on classified trips, but do not report classified trips to GSA.)

[FTR Amdt. 2004-02, 69 FR 34304, June 21, 2004, as amended by FTR Amdt. 2010-04, 75 FR 59095, Sept. 27, 2010]
No. 11-5004.

#### Taylor v. United States.

C. A. 7th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ANACOMP,
INC.'S DECEMBER 31, 1996 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-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         81,171
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  67,428
<ALLOWANCES>                                   6,850
<INVENTORY>                                    29,968
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               182,426
<PP&E>                                         34,090
<DEPRECIATION>                                 5,943
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 450,526
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          112,769
<BONDS>                                        261,067
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       137
<OTHER-SE>                                     70,437
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   450,526
<SALES>                                        71,028
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               116,453
<CGS>                                          50,932
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  120,534
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             9,802
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (8,114)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   4,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (12,914)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (12,914)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (1.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (1.01)
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U. S. C.SECTION 1350 ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF**

**THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Inconnection with the Amended Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of EnvironmentalSolutions Worldwide, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period June30, 2013 (the "Report"), Praveen Nair, Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U. S. C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1).To my knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

DATE: AUGUST 19,2013

/S/PRAVEEN NAIRPRAVEEN NAIRCHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906, or otherdocument authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signaturethat appears in typed form within the electronic version of this writtenstatement required by Section 906, has been provided to Environmental SolutionsWorldwide, Inc. and will be retained by Environmental Solutions Worldwide, Inc.and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.
Editorial Note on Part 1
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 1.1919 Contracting for collection services. ( a ) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section, the Commission may contract with private collection contractors, as defined in 31 U.S.C. 3701(f), to recover delinquent debts. In that regard, the Commission: ( 1 ) Retains the authority to resolve disputes, compromise debts, suspend or terminate collection activity, and refer debts for litigation;
( 2 ) Restricts the private collection contractor from offering, as an incentive for payment, the opportunity to pay the debt less the private collection contractor's fee unless the Commission has granted such authority prior to the offer;
( 3 ) Specifically requires, as a term of its contract with the private collection contractor, that the private collection contractor is subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 to the extent specified in 5 U.S.C. 552a(m), and to applicable Federal and state laws and regulations pertaining to debt collection practices, including but not limited to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692; and
( 4 ) The private collection contractor is required to account for all amounts collected.
( b ) Although the Commission will use government-wide debt collection contracts to obtain debt collection services provided by private collection contractors, the Commission may refer debts to private collection contractors pursuant to a contract between the Commission and the private collection contractor in those situations where the Commission is not required to transfer debt to the Secretary of the Treasury for debt collection.
( c ) Agencies may fund private collection contractor in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3718(d), or as otherwise permitted by law.
( d ) The Commission may enter into contracts for locating and recovering assets of the United States, such as unclaimed assets, but it will first establish procedures that are acceptable to Treasury before entering into contracts to recover assets of the United States held by a state government or a financial institution.
( e ) The Commission may enter into contracts for debtor asset and income search reports. In accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3718(d), such contracts may provide that the fee a contractor charges the Commission for such services may be payable from the amounts recovered, unless otherwise prohibited by statute. In that regard, fees for those services will be added to the amount collected and are part of the administrative collection costs passed on to the debtor. *See* § 1.1940.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Year-to-Date Activity 

as of November 1, 2013

Court or Agency of Origin

Pending as of 

10/01/13

Docketed 

10/01/13 to date

Terminated 

10/01/13 to date

Currently 

Pending 

Boards of Contract Appeals 8 1 1 8

Court of Federal Claims 119 15 15 119

Court of International Trade 55 3 0 58

Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims 104 16 19 101

District Courts 438 38 25 451

Department of Justice 2 0 0 2

Department of Veterans Affairs 1 0 0 1

International Trade Commission 19 2 1 20

Merit Systems Protection Board 104 28 20 112

Office of Personnel Management 0 0 0 0

Office of Compliance 0 0 0 0

Patent & Trademark Office 118 12 17 113

Writs 15 5 4 16

TOTAL 983 120 102 1001