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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CURRENCY>                                     US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.000
<CASH>                                         956,093
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  6,933,087
<ALLOWANCES>                                   816,815
<INVENTORY>                                    250,331
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               7,770,347
<PP&E>                                         37,637,464
<DEPRECIATION>                                 18,872,683
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 27,041,966
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          5,652,223
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       765
<OTHER-SE>                                     19,844,174
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   27,041,966
<SALES>                                        21,307,391
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               21,383,765
<CGS>                                          13,728,331
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  15,977,866
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               3,198,098
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               238,394
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             881,731
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1,326,070
<INCOME-TAX>                                   48,300
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,277,770
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,277,770
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.16



</TABLE>
| Skip to Content*Release Date: March 12, 2015*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical data | Technical Q&AsCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**F.116.s Life Insurance Companies Separate Accounts** |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-04-099-CV

VALENCIA W. DIMOCK	APPELLANT

	V.

JOE W. DIMOCK	APPELLEE

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

	FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF WICHITA COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	Pursuant to Civil Practice & Remedies Code section 51.014(d), Appellant Valencia W. Dimock timely perfected this interlocutory appeal from the trial court’s March 30, 2004 “Order Regarding Validity of the Postnuptial Agreements.”  Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(d) (Vernon Supp. 2004).  The trial court signed an order authorizing this appeal, and both parties agreed to the order.  All statutory requisites have been met in this permissive interlocutory appeal, and this court “may permit an appeal to be taken” from the trial court’s order.  Id. § 51.014(f).

	We have closely reviewed the issue presented:  Whether the parties’ post-nuptial partition agreement is enforceable.  Resolution of this issue pivots on fact issues that must be resolved in the trial court.  See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §§ 4.001-.206 (Vernon 1989).  The case-by-case resolution of the enforceability of a particular postnuptial partition agreement does not involve a “controlling question of law as to which there is a substantial ground for difference of opinion.”  Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(d)(1).  Accordingly, we deny the application for interlocutory appeal.  See id. § 5114(d).  We also deny as moot Appellant’s “Motion to Extend Time to Request Clerk’s Record and Court Reporter’s Record.” 

								SUE WALKER

								JUSTICE

PANEL B:	HOLMAN, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DELIVERED: May 6, 2004
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 ORDER

Page - 1

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

VINCENT DANIEL HOPPER, a/k/a Vincent

Daniel Hopper Marks, a/k/a Antolin Andrew

Marks, a/k/a Wayne Rudder,

Plaintiff,

v.

NEIL CLARK, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C06-5282 RBL/KLS

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION

The Court, having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Karen L.

Strombom, objections to the Report and Recommendation, if any, and the remaining record, does here find

and ORDER:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation;

(2) Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 12) is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s Complaint 

(Dkt. # 5) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to Defendants Clark, Garman and

Melendez;

(3) This matter shall be re-referred to the Honorable Karen L. Strombom for further

proceedings as to the remaining defendants.

(4) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Plaintiff, counsel for Defendants and to

the Honorable Karen L. Strombom.

DATED this 16th day of February, 2007.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05282-RBL Document 28 Filed 02/16/07 Page 1 of 1
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

RICHARD ROY SCOTT,

Plaintiff,

v.

WILL BAILEY,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-5173RBL

ORDER ADOPTING

REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION

 The Court, having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge J. Kelley

Arnold, objections to the report and recommendation, if any, and the remaining record, does hereby

find and ORDER:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation;

(2) An answer was filed before plaintiff signed his motion for default. The motion is

DENIED.

(3) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to plaintiff, counsel for defendant,

and to the Hon. J. Kelley Arnold.

DATED this 7th day of September, 2006.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05173-RBL Document 43 Filed 09/07/06 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BALANCE
SHEET AND STATEMENT OF INCOME 12-31-97 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         986,026
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   68,559
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     64,138
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,302,459
<PP&E>                                       6,433,829
<DEPRECIATION>                                 886,623
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,160,959
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          424,926
<BONDS>                                      3,608,302
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,855
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,847,310
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,160,959
<SALES>                                      2,146,788
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,587,930
<CGS>                                          689,397
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,094,885
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             169,719
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                342,380
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   342,380
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
No. 66107.

#### Shell Oil Company, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 59/29641 (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of cutback asphalt the same in all material respects as that the subject of *American Bitumuls*& *Asphalt Co.*v. *United States*(45 Cust. Ct. 1, C.D. 2188), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 58729.

protest 228535-K (New York).

#### Freund Mayer & Co., Inc., and H. W. Robinson & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of paper napkins the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Freund Mayer & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 123, C. A. D. 474). Upon the agreed statement of facts and following the cited authority, it was held that the merchandise is dutiable at 15 percent under said paragraph 1413, as modified, *supra.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                            3084
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   469174
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      53010
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                525268
<PP&E>                                          123233
<DEPRECIATION>                                   62601
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  585900
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4385751
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        566
<COMMON>                                        170324
<OTHER-SE>                                    (7897930)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    535900
<SALES>                                         670082
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                670082
<CGS>                                           165492
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   165492
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                904940
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              167685
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (170668)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (170668)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (170668)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.007)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.007)


</TABLE>
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARY STAY OF REMOVAL 

PAGE – 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

ABDOULAYE DIALLO, )

) Case No. C06-756-RSL-JPD

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) 

) ORDER GRANTING

ALBERTO GONZALES, ) TEMPORARY STAY OF

) REMOVAL

Respondent. )

_________________________________________)

On May 30, 2006, petitioner’s Petition for Review and Motion for Stay of Removal was

transferred from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to this Court. (Dkt.

#1, Attach. 2). Petitioner challenges the legality of his custody by the U.S. Immigration and

Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) and seeks a stay of his removal proceedings. The Court does

hereby ORDER:

(1) Petitioner’s removal is temporarily STAYED pending briefing and a resolution of

petitioner’s motion for stay. The Court expresses no views at this time as to the merits of

petitioner’s petition and motion for stay.

 (2) Respondent shall file a response to petitioner’s motion for stay within 15 days of

the entry of this Order.

(3) The Clerk shall direct a copy of this Order to all counsel of record, and shall

forward a copy of this Order to Judge Donohue.

Case 2:06-cv-00756-RSL Document 5 Filed 06/08/2006 Page 1 of 2

Diallo v. Gonzales Doc. 5

Dockets.Justia.com
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARY STAY OF REMOVAL 

PAGE – 2

DATED this 8th day of June, 2006.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge 

Recommended for Entry

this 1st day of June, 2006.

/s/ JAMES P. DONOHUE 

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00756-RSL Document 5 Filed 06/08/2006 Page 2 of 2
1 Judge Marsha Pechman

2

3

4

5

6

7 "

8g UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OR WASHINGTON

9 AT SEATTLE

10 |] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
NO. CR06-0042P

ll Plaintitf,

12 y. ACCEPTANCE OF PLEA OF
GUILTY, ADJUDICATION OF

13 GUILT AND NOTICE OF
SENTENCING

“4

CHRISTOPHER MAXWELL,
15
Defendant.
16
7 This Court, having considered the Report and Recommendation of the

18 | United States Magistrate Judge, to which there has been no timely objection, and

19 | subject to consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(3),
20 | hereby accepts the plea of guilty of the defendant to the charge(s) contained in the

21 | Indictment, and the defendant is adjudged guilty of such offense. All parties shall

22 | appear before this Court for sentencing as directed.

23 IT IS SO ORDERED this day of » 2006.

24
UHM) RL A
YHORIOG AE V0

-CR-W0042-PRO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

a

RULE 11 PLEA/CHRISTOPHER MAXWELL UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
RO6.0042P seat, Wasingon SIDI
(2005) 453-7970
No. 57761.

protests 184493-K and 188456-K (New York).

#### Armour & Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise in question is a synthetic resin having a molecular weight of approximately 80,000, is a medicinal preparation, has therapeutic properties, is chiefly used for medicinal purposes, and is not a drug of either animal or vegetable origin. In plaintiff’s brief, it was pointed out thar the agreed facts established that the merchandise in issue is both a synthetic resin and a medicinal preparation. Citing *United States*v. *Lo Curto & Funk*(17 C. C. P. A. 19, T. D. 43319), holding that the provision for “all medicinal preparations” is a designation by use, plaintiff invoked the well-settled rule under the doctrine of relative specificity that in the absence of a contrary legislative intent a designation by use will control classification over an *eo nomine*or descriptive provision. It was held that no contrary legislative intent appears here. Since the soundness of the application of the rule to the situation at bar apparently was not questioned by the defendant, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Case 2:06-cv-00556-TSZ Document 8 Filed 05/26/2006 Page 1 of 8

Rinde v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Doc. 8

Dockets.Justia.com
Case 2:06-cv-00556-TSZ Document 8 Filed 05/26/2006 Page 2 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00556-TSZ Document 8 Filed 05/26/2006 Page 3 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00556-TSZ Document 8 Filed 05/26/2006 Page 4 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00556-TSZ Document 8 Filed 05/26/2006 Page 5 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00556-TSZ Document 8 Filed 05/26/2006 Page 6 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00556-TSZ Document 8 Filed 05/26/2006 Page 7 of 8
Case 2:06-cv-00556-TSZ Document 8 Filed 05/26/2006 Page 8 of 8
No. 66094.

#### Novelty Import Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 60/30219, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of plastic back scratchers the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Ignaz Strauss & Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(45 Cust. Ct. 161, C.D. 2218), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 67181.

protest 61/19039 (Los Angeles).

#### Lundsing & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of bread similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *Nordic Baking & Importing Co., Inc.*(47 C.C.P.A. 78, C.A.D. 733), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Faheem Hasnain, President and Chief Executive Officer of Facet Biotech Corporation, certify that:

(1)   I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Facet Biotech Corporation;

(2)   Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

(3)   Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4)   The
registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
for the registrant and have:



(5)   The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



Date:
March 30, 2009

|                                                                                                      |  | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ FAHEEM HASNAIN Faheem Hasnain President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) |  | 

---



QuickLinks
#### John Frederick BALLENTINE, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 05-6336.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 18, 2005.

Decided Aug. 24, 2005.

*215John Frederick Ballentine, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

John Frederick Ballentine appeals the district court’s order accepting a magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and a subsequent order denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See Ballentine v. Virginia Parole Bd.,*No. CA-04-537-3 (E.D. Va. Dec. 6, 2004 & Jan. 26, 2005). 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.

*AFFIRMED*
Exhibit 31.2


I, Scott Emerson Lybbert, certify that:

        1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of TGFIN
Holdings, Inc.;

        2.   Based upon my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain
any untrue statements of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under
which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this quarterly report;

        3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly represent in
all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
quarterly report;

        4.   The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

               a)   designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is
being prepared;

               b)   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date
of this annual report (the Evaluation Date"); and

               c)   presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

        5.   The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the
audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

               a)   all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for
the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

               b)   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
internal controls; and

        6.   The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated
in this annual report whether there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

     /s/ Scott Emerson Lybbert      Chief Financial Officer
    --------------------------
         Scott Emerson Lybbert      May 11, 2006
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Unclassified report on thePresident�s Surveillance Program**
 
Unclassified report, 2009 | Redacted Full Report, 2015
 
SuDoc Number:D 1.2:SU 7/2
Item Number:0306 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000647162
 
December 16, 2019