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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,909,000
<SECURITIES>                                     8,148
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,351,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   863,000
<INVENTORY>                                 12,289,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            34,429,000
<PP&E>                                      27,377,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,822,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             112,565,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       13,140,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 20,559,000
<COMMON>                                   105,874,000
<OTHER-SE>                                (51,585,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               112,565,000
<SALES>                                     41,533,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            42,284,000
<CGS>                                       37,846,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               39,585,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            28,637,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         (2,894,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (28,299,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (1,158,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (26,999,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (26,999,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.74)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.74)
        

</TABLE>
Case 2:04-cv-00623-MCE -DAD Document 21 Filed 08/17/06 Page 1 of 2Case 2:04-cv-00623-MCE -DAD Document 21 Filed 08/17/06 Page 2 of 2
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PETER ANTONIO TAYLOR,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-0981 LKK KJM P

vs.

T.L. CAREY, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

On July 12, 2005, petitioner submitted an opposition to respondent’s motion to

dismiss. That document was not served on respondent. Petitioner is advised that every

document submitted to the court for consideration must be served on respondent. Fed. R. Civ. P.

5; Rule 11, Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. Documents not to be served electronically are

usually served by placing a copy in the U.S. Mail. If an attorney has filed a document with the

court on behalf of respondent, then documents submitted by petitioner must be served on that

attorney and not on the respondent himself. Every document submitted conventionally to the

court (e.g., on paper by a prisoner proceeding pro se) must include a certificate stating the date an

accurate copy of the document was mailed to respondent or his attorney and the address to which

it was mailed. See Local Rule 5-135(b) and (c).

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00981-LKK -KJM Document 13 Filed 07/27/05 Page 1 of 2
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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within fifteen days from the date of

this order petitioner shall serve a copy of his opposition to respondent’s motion to dismiss upon

respondent and file proper proof of said service. Petitioner is cautioned that failure to comply

with this order may result in imposition of sanctions. 

DATED: July 26, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1/kf

tayl0981.135

Case 2:04-cv-00981-LKK -KJM Document 13 Filed 07/27/05 Page 2 of 2
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, 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 1, 2011 

t0525 

Order 

 

June 1, 2011 

142448 

VERNA SPAYTH, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 142448 

 COA: 292460 

Washtenaw CC: 08-001000-NO 

CITY OF ANN ARBOR, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 7, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

 HATHAWAY, J., would grant leave to appeal. 

 ZAHRA, J., did not participate because he was on the Court of Appeals panel.
No. 65484.

#### Empire Findings Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 59/26643, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of otoscopes similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Empire Findings Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(44 Cust. Ct. 21, C.D. 2148), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ September 2 7 , 2019

ERRATUM

______________________

Appeal No. 201 8

- 1635

SIPCO, LLC, Appellant

v.

EMERSON ELECTRIC CO. , Appellee

De cided: September 25 , 2019 Precedential Opinion

______________________

The following change has been made : Page 2 , line 5 , of the opinion concurring

- in

- part and dissenting

- in

- part, “ tenants ” has been changed to “ tenets ”

.
### FUNDS HELD BY THE PUBLIC – NON-BUDGETARY

**FISCAL YEAR 2016**

**PREPARED BY:**

**UNITED STATES STANDARD GENERAL LEDGER ADVISORY DIVISION**

**GOVERNMENTWIDE ACCOUNTING**

**BUREAU OF THE FISCAL SERVICE**

**U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY**

**Funds Held by the Public – Non-Budgetary**

**Effective Fiscal 2016**

NOTE**:  This scenario follows USSGL TFM S2 15-01 (June 2015) Part 2.**

### Overview

During the initial reporting periods where agencies started using the Governmentwide Treasury Account Symbol Adjusted Trial Balance System (GTAS) it was discovered that agencies that had Funds Held Outside of Treasury (FHOT) that are non-budgetary didn’t have a USSGL account that they were able to use so that they can record their FHOT non-budgetary in order to pass GTAS edit 5 - Funds Held Outside of Treasury Business Line Balances.  After a datacall to agencies and discussions with the Bureau of the Fiscal Service Cash Accounting Division it was determined that the best solution would be to create a new USSGL account for agencies to use when they have non-budgetary FHOT that is recorded in the Central Accounting Reporting System (CARS).  

**New USSGL Account**

**Account Title:** Funds Held by the Public – Non-Budgetary

**Account Number**: 113500

**Normal Balance:** Debit

**Definition:** The amount of funds held by the public that the Office of Management and Budget has determined will not be included in the Budget of the United States Government. This account does not close at yearend.

**Listing of USSGL Accounts Used in This Scenario**

**Attribute Table**

Attribute Table (continued)

Attribute Table (continued)

**Crosswalks Impacted**

# USSGL Scenario   

A beginning Trial Balance is not applicable in this scenario.

**Illustrative Transactions**

1. To record $100 for total amount received and deposited in a Non-Treasury General Account at a bank.  These funds are held temporarily by the Government until ownership is determined.

2. To disburse $100 after ownership has been determined.

� The  Business Event Type Codes (BETCs) referenced in this transaction are very high-level examples which purposely focus on a limited number of BETCs due to the extent of the many possible BETC combinations based on the Treasury Account Symbol (TAS).   The scenario is not meant to address all the BETCs, please refer to the Shared Accounting Module (SAM) public website at � HYPERLINK "https://www.sam.fms.treas.gov/sampublic" �https://www.sam.fms.treas.gov/sampublic�  for a complete and appropriate list of the most current TAS BETC information.

.

38

**3 of 8****May 7, 2015**
/Letterhead/

                             Schvaneveldt & Company
                           Certified Public Accountant
                           275 East South Temple, #300
                           Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
                                  801-521-2392


Darrell T. Schvaneveldt, C.P.A.




                       Consent of Darrell T. Schvaneveldt 
                               Independent Auditor




     I consent to the use, of our report dated July 31, 1997, on the financial
statements of Customer Sports, Inc., dated December 8, 1997, included herein.



/S/ Schvaneveldt & Company
Salt Lake City, Utah 
December 12, 1997
# Sheet1

&"Arial,Bold"Part 2SUPPLEMENT &"Arial,Regular"	&"Arial,Bold"&16&KFF0000DRAFT	&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2020 ReportingSection VII&"Arial,Regular"

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2020-08	&"Arial,Bold"&KFF0000DRAFT&K000000 VII VDR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout 12/5/19
No. 52572.

protest 53253-K (Baltimore).

#### May Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoice should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on the entry. The protest was sustained to this extent.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4183 

To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 relating to authority of 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection to consolidate, modify, or reorganize 

Customs revenue functions. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 18, 2024 

Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. CASEY) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 relating to 

authority of U.S. Customs and Border Protection to 

consolidate, modify, or reorganize Customs revenue functions. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORITY OF U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER 

4 PROTECTION TO CONSOLIDATE, MODIFY, OR 

5 REORGANIZE CUSTOMS REVENUE FUNC6 TIONS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 412 of the Homeland Se8 curity Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 212) is amended— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4183 IS

1 (1) in subsection (b)— 

2 (A) in paragraph (1)— 

3 (i) by striking ‘‘consolidate, dis4 continue,’’ and inserting ‘‘discontinue’’; 

5 and 

6 (ii) by inserting after ‘‘reduce the 

7 staffing level’’ the following: ‘‘below the op8 timal staffing level determined in the most 

9 recent Resource Allocation Model required 

10 by section 301(h) of the Customs Proce11 dural Reform and Simplification Act of 

12 1978 (19 U.S.C. 2075(h))’’; and 

13 (B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ‘‘, Na14 tional Account Managers, International Trade 

15 Analysts’’ after ‘‘Financial Systems Special16 ists’’; and 

17 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

18 ‘‘(d) AUTHORITY TO CONSOLIDATE, MODIFY, OR RE19 ORGANIZE CUSTOMS REVENUE FUNCTIONS.— 

20 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Commissioner of U.S. 

21 Customs and Border Protection may, subject to sub22 section (b), consolidate, modify, or reorganize cus23 toms revenue functions delegated to the Commis24 sioner under subsection (a), including by adding 

25 such functions to existing positions or establishing 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4183 IS

1 new or modifying existing job series, grades, titles, 

2 or classifications for personnel, and associated sup3 port staff, performing such functions, in consultation 

4 with the Office of Personnel Management. 

5 ‘‘(2) POSITION CLASSIFICATION STANDARDS.— 

6 At the request of the Commissioner of U.S. Customs 

7 and Border Protection, the Director of the Office of 

8 Personnel Management shall establish new position 

9 classification standards for any new positions estab10 lished by the Commissioner under paragraph (1).’’. 

11 (b) TECHNICAL CORRECTION.—Section 412(a)(1) of 

12 the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 212(a)(1)) 

13 is amended by striking ‘‘403(a)(1)’’ and inserting 

14 ‘‘403(1)’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Horizon Medical Products,
Inc. (the "Corporation") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned, the Corporate Controller and Principal Financial
Officer of the Corporation, hereby certifies:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Corporation.


/s/ Elaine Swygert
-------------------------------------------------------
Elaine Swygert
Corporate Controller and Principal Financial Officer

December 2, 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 Horizon Medical
Products, Inc. and will be retained by Horizon Medical Products, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

1

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

Install the OTCnet Local Bridge (OLB) Certificate

To install the OTCnet Local Bridge (OLB) certificate, complete the following steps:

1. Locate the folder where the OLB certificate file (i.e., olb.otcnet.public.crt) resides, and 

double-click the file as shown in Figure 1. 

Figure 1. OTCnet OLB Certificate .crt icon

2. The Certificate dialog box appears. Click Install Certificate. 

3. The Welcome to the Certificate Import Wizard dialog box appears. Click Next.

4. The Certificate Store dialog box appears. Click the Place all certificates in the following 

store radio button.

• Click Cancel to stop installing the certificate. 

• Click Back to return to the Welcome to the Certificate Import Wizard dialog box.

5. Under Certificate Store, click Browse. 

6. The Select Certificate Store dialog box appears. Select the Trusted Root Certification 

Authorities folder and click OK.

7. Click Next.

8. The Completing the Certificate Import Wizard dialog box appears. Click Finish.

9. After The import was successful message appears, click OK. 

Additional Buttons
# C_2017014EN.01005502.xml

| 16.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 14/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 14/55

---

Order of the General Court of 13 October 2016 — Axium v Parliament

(Case T-392/16) (1)

(2017/C 014/66)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 326, 5.9.2016.

---
Before the Third Division,

May 14, 1959

No. 63065.

#### I. Miller & Sons, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 58/3649 (New York).

*382Opinion by

Johnson, J.

An examination of collector’s memorandum, received in evidence at the trial, indicating that the merchandise would now be entitled to free entry, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1680

In re: JAMES K. BURKS, JR., a/k/a Howard Theodore Wright, a/k/a Nathan King, 

a/k/a Derrick Baxter, a/k/a Marcus Allen, a/k/a Martin Wilson, a/k/a Marcus 

Williams,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:93-cr-00460-CMH-1)

Submitted: October 17, 2019 Decided: October 21, 2019

Before MOTZ and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James K. Burks, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

James K. Burks, Jr., petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court 

has unduly delayed in ruling on his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. He seeks an order from 

this court directing the district court to act. We find the present record does not reveal 

undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis 

and deny the mandamus petition. 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.

PETITION DENIED
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

 A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem. Co. v. Weisman, 1

803 F.2d 500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 1980).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEREMY P. PUCKETT,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-0604 MCE PAN P

vs.

D. L. RUNNEL, Warden, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

This action was dismissed on March 30, 2006. On May 22, 2006, petitioner filed

a letter requesting a thirty day extension of time to file a petition for writ of habeas corpus. On

June 2, 2006, petitioner filed a new action seeking federal habeas corpus relief, Case No. CIV S06-1200 FCD CMK P. Petitioner’s May 22, 2006 request will therefore be disregarded. All

1

future documents filed by petitioner in connection with his request for federal habeas corpus

relief shall be filed in Case No. CIV S-06-1200 FCD CMK P. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 27, 2006.

12;puck0604.159

Case 2:04-cv-00604-MCE -PAN Document 15 Filed 07/28/06 Page 1 of 1
#### VAN ROEKEL FARMS, INC., Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Appellee.

No. 00-3215.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted June 21, 2001.

Filed June 25, 2001.

*440Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and FAGG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Van Roekel Farms, Inc. (Taxpayer) appeals the tax court’s ruling upholding the Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s decision that Taxpayer’s Employee Stock Ownership Plan did not qualify under 26 U.S.C. § 401(a), and thus, the Taxpayer’s related Employee Stock Ownership Trust was not exempt from income tax. Contrary to Taxpayer’s argument that it paid “management fees” to its founder, Eugene Van Roekel, as an employee and not as an independent contractor, the tax court’s order notes Taxpayer’s concession that Van Roekel was an independent contractor and the scant record before this court does not indicate that Taxpayer ever sought to prove otherwise. Indeed, the treatment of the management fees on the Taxpayer’s and Van Roekel’s tax returns show Van Roekel was an independent contractor. Having considered the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude the Taxpayer’s argument is foreclosed by circuit precedent. *See Howard E. Clendenen Inc. v. Commissioner,*207 F.3d 1071 at 1072-73, 1075 (8th Cir.2000). We affirm on the basis of the tax court’s opinion. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.
Exhibit 13.1

                            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 Annual Report of Israel Bank of Agriculture Ltd. (the
"Bank") on Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), We, Lea
Patalovsky, General Manager of the Bank, and Yakov Cohen, Chief Financial
Officer of the Bank, 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; and

(2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Bank.

July 8, 2004

Lea Patalovsky
General Manager

/s/ Lea Patalovsky
----------------------


Yakov Cohen
Chief Financial Officer

/s/ Yakov Cohen
----------------------
No. 67840.

#### J. E. Bernard & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 61/6178-11924, etc. (Chicago).

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of celluloid reindeer similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 56902, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MERRICK JOSE MOORE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0871 MCE PAN P

vs.

J. SLOSS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On March 15, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion for an order compelling defendants

Sloss, Lewis and Wagner to provide further responses to several interrogatories included in

plaintiff’s first set of interrogatories to said defendants. Defendants oppose the motion on the

ground that plaintiff has failed to set forth with any specificity deficiencies in the interrogatory

responses served by defendants in October 2005. Defendants’ opposition is well-taken. 

Plaintiff’s motion will therefore be denied.

On May 19, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion styled as a discovery motion pursuant to

California Government Code § 6250 et seq. by which he seeks to compel defense counsel to

provide additional information to enable service of process to be completed on defendant H. 

Case 2:04-cv-00871-MCE -EFB Document 46 Filed 08/02/06 Page 1 of 2
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

2

Way. Good cause appearing, defendants will be directed to file a response to the motion within

ten days from the date of this order. The deadline for plaintiff to file additional information for

service of process on defendant Way will be extended by one additional period of sixty days.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s March 15, 2006 motion to compel is denied; and

2. Within ten days from the date of this order defendants shall file and serve a

response to plaintiff’s May 19, 2006 motion for discovery.

3. Plaintiff is granted an additional period of sixty days from the date of this order

to submit the documents required by the court’s May 3, 2006 order. 

DATED: July 27, 2006.

12/mp

moor0871.mtc

Case 2:04-cv-00871-MCE -EFB Document 46 Filed 08/02/06 Page 2 of 2