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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Balance
Sheet, Statement of Operations, Statement of Cash Flows and Notes thereto
incorporated in this Form 10-K and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          37,699
<SECURITIES>                                   715,075
<RECEIVABLES>                                  866,807
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (17,336)
<INVENTORY>                                    475,626
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,092,169
<PP&E>                                         210,488
<DEPRECIATION>                                (10,480)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,232,981
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,374,988
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        61,024
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,967,742
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,232,981
<SALES>                                      1,465,294
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,465,294
<CGS>                                        1,262,396
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,262,396
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               502,342
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             (299,444)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,436
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (299,444)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (299,444)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (299,444)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.051)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.030)


</TABLE>
<TABLE>
          INDIANAPOLIS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY                       EXHIBIT 12.1

          Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
<CAPTION>


                                                     YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                             ---------------------------------------------
                                               1999              1998              1997
                                             ---------         ---------         ---------
                                                        (Thousands of Dollars)
<S>                                          <C>               <C>               <C>
Earnings, as defined:
     Net income (1)                          $146,231          $149,147          $133,402
     Income taxes                              85,056            84,386            74,440
     Fixed charges, as below                   41,094            40,991            41,893
                                             ---------         ---------         ---------
         Total earnings, as defined          $272,381          $274,524          $249,735
                                             =========         =========         =========
Fixed charges, as defined:
     Interest charges                        $ 41,020          $ 40,810          $ 41,721
     Rental interest factor                        74               181               172
                                             ---------         ---------         ---------
         Total fixed charges, as defined     $ 41,094          $ 40,991          $ 41,893
                                             =========         =========         =========
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges               6.63              6.70              5.96
                                             =========         =========         =========

(1) 1997 Net income excludes after-tax effect of cumulative effect of accounting change

</TABLE>
July 24, 1956

Reap. Dec. 8627.

#### *Albert Mottola, an individual doing business under the name and style of Atlas Shipping Co.*v. *United States.*

Entered at New York, N. Y. Reap. Dec. 8586. Motion by defendant.
<TABLE>                     
                     INDIANAPOLIS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY                         EXHIBIT 12.1

                     Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
<CAPTION>



                                                     YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                             ---------------------------------------------
                                               1995              1994              1993
                                             ---------         ---------         ---------
                                                      (Thousands of Dollars)

<S>                                          <C>               <C>               <C>
Earnings, as defined:
     Net income                              $106,273          $103,823          $102,766
     Income taxes                              53,568            54,720            59,273
     Fixed charges, as below                   51,778            48,302            44,655
                                             ---------         ---------         ---------
         Total earnings, as defined          $211,619          $206,845          $206,694
                                             =========         =========         =========
Fixed charges, as defined:
     Interest charges                        $ 51,596          $ 48,164          $ 44,491
     Rental interest factor                       182               138               164
                                             ---------         ---------         ---------
         Total fixed charges, as defined     $ 51,778          $ 48,302          $ 44,655
                                             =========         =========         =========
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges               4.09              4.28              4.63
                                             =========         =========         =========

</TABLE>
#### Jose Armando HERRERA-MARROQUIN, a/k/a Jose Armando Marroquin, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

No. 99-71168.

I & NS No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Feb. 12, 2001.

Decided March 19, 2001.

*459Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, WALLACE and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

Jose Herrera-Marroquin, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming an immigration judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of deportation pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(a) *&*1253(h)(1994). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(1994)1, and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Herrera-Marroquin failed to establish either past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. *See INS v. Elias-Zaca*rias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). There is no evidence that he was ever specifically threatened or that he was ever otherwise persecuted in any way. Nor is there is evidence that Herrera-Marroquin has an objectively reasonable fear of future persecution. *See Fisher v. INS,*79 F.3d 955, 960 (9th Cir.1996) (en banc). There is no compelling evidence in the record that the government or the guerrillas are aware of his political beliefs or that they would target him on his return. Thus, Herrera-Marroquin does not have a well-founded fear of future persecution.

Because Herrera-Marroquin failed to meet the lesser standard of proof required to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily failed to satisfy the more stringent standard to establish eligibility for withholding of deportation. *See Ghaly v. INS,*58 F.3d 1425, 1429 (1995).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 ("IIRIRA”) repealed 8 U.S.C. § 1105a and replaced it with a new judicial review provision codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1252. See IIRIRA § 306(c)(1), Pub.L. No. 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009 (Sept. 30, 1996), as amended by Act of Oct. 11, 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-302, 110 Stat. 3656. However, because the new review provision does not apply to petitioners whose deportation proceedings commenced before April 1, 1997, we continue to have jurisdiction over this petition under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). See IIRIRA § 309(c)(1).
Case 2:05-cv-05934-MK Document 1 Filed 11/10/05 Page 1 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-05934-MK Document 1 Filed 11/10/05 Page 2 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-05934-MK Document 1 Filed 11/10/05 Page 3 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-05934-MK Document 1 Filed 11/10/05 Page 4 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-05934-MK Document 1 Filed 11/10/05 Page 5 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-05934-MK Document 1 Filed 11/10/05 Page 6 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-05934-MK Document 1 Filed 11/10/05 Page 7 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-05934-MK Document 1 Filed 11/10/05 Page 8 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-05934-MK Document 1 Filed 11/10/05 Page 9 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-05934-MK Document 1 Filed 11/10/05 Page 10 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-05934-MK Document 1 Filed 11/10/05 Page 11 of 11
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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Mark A. DuRoss,

Petitioner, No. Civ. S 04-0638 DFL PAN P

vs. Order

Scott Kernan, Warden,

et al.,

Respondents.

-oOoOn March 30, 2004, petitioner filed a petition for a writ of

habeas corpus. On June 24, 2005, the court dismissed this action

as untimely and the clerk of the court duly entered judgment. 

Petitioner seeks relief from judgment.

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b): 

On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court

may relieve a party or a party’s legal representative

from a final judgment, order or proceeding for the

following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise,

or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence 

Case 2:04-cv-00638-DFL-PAN Document 41 Filed 11/14/05 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

which by due diligence could not have been discovered

in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b); (3)

fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or

extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of

an adverse party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the

judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged, or

a prior judgment upon which it is based has been

reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer

equitable that the judgment should have prospective

application; or (6) any other reason justifying relief

from the operation of the judgment.

Petitioner asserts it is fundamentally unfair for the court

to find the petition in this case untimely after dismissing the

petition in DuRoss v. California State Prison, No. Civ. S-01-2312

DFL PAN P for petitioner’s failure to exhaust. But Supreme Court

precedent requires dismissal of petitions containing no exhausted

claims. Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270 (1971). Accordingly,

petitioner does not demonstrate that he is entitled to relief

from judgment.

Therefore, petitioner’s July 6, July 26, August 9, and

September 20, 2005, requests are denied.

So ordered.

DATED: 11/11/2005

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00638-DFL-PAN Document 41 Filed 11/14/05 Page 2 of 2
- Bureau of the Fiscal Service
- Intra-Governmental Payment and Collection
- Metric Resources
- IPAC Stats for December 2023

# IPAC Transaction Count December 2023

Table may scroll on smaller screens 

Last modified 01/04/24
No. 64067.

protest 59/21093 (New York).

#### Horrockses (U.S.A.), Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

The protest was dismissed.
Page 1 of 1

Part 2, Section I: Chart of Accounts

The Chart of Accounts provides the basic structure for the U.S. Standard General Ledger (USSGL). It 

incorporates both proprietary and budgetary accounts. The proprietary and budgetary sets of general 

ledger accounts are self-balancing (total debits equal total credits). It is important to note that central 

agency reporting requires a lower level of detail than the 6-digit USSGL account numbers provided. 

Therefore, the USSGL Board developed attributes containing various domain values that, when added to a 

basic 6-digit USSGL account, provide the appropriate level of detail needed for central agency reporting 

and, in effect, create new USSGL accounts. See Section IV for attribute definitions and domain values. It is 

this lower level of detail, the basic 6-digit USSGL account plus applicable attribute domain values, that 

agencies must capture at the transaction level to (1) comply with USSGL policy, and (2) achieve the 

desired result for proper reporting.

The basic 6-digit USSGL accounts are classified as follows:

100000 Assets

200000 Liabilities

300000 Net Position

400000 Budgetary

500000 Revenue and Other Financing Sources

600000 Expenses

700000 Gains/Losses/Miscellaneous Items

800000 Memorandum

Agencies may expand this numbering system to as many digits as necessary to accommodate agency

specific requirements. However, subsidiary accounts must summarize or “roll up” to the 6-digit USSGL 

accounts plus any related attributes.

In February 1999, the USSGL Board voted to delete summary accounts. However, agencies may 

summarize accounts as they find useful. Section headings replace many of the deleted summary accounts 

to maintain the integrity of the account structure.
No. 58954.

protest 228938-K (Philadelphia).

#### Charles Kurz & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of aluminum or duraluminum scrap in sheets or strips and that it is a nonferrous metal scrap, not ores nor concentrates, nor virgin nor crude metal; that said scrap was imported to be used in remanufacture by melting; that, after importation, it was melted and manufactured into aluminum ingots; and that there had been compliance with the regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to Public Law 869, *supra.*Upon the agreed statement of facts, it was held that the merchandise comes within the provisions of Public Law 869, *supra,*and is properly entitled to free entry.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                 STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER FURNISHED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

        The undersigned, Gary F. Hoskins, is the Chief Financial Officer of
Citizens South Banking Corporation (the "Company").

        This statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the
Company of the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2005 (the "Report").

        By execution of this statement, I certify that to the best of my
knowledge:

                A)      the Report fully complies with the requirements of
                        Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
                        1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and

                B)      the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
                        in all material respects, the financial condition and
                        results of operations of the Company as of the dates and
                        for the periods covered by the Report.

        This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report
so that this statement will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not intended that this
statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended.

        A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Citizens South Banking Corporation and will be retained by
Citizens South Banking Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

May 5, 2005                                              /s/ Gary F. Hoskins
Dated                                                    -----------------------
                                                         Gary F. Hoskins
                                                         Chief Financial Officer
No. 50409.

#### Protest 485614-G of Kaplan Bros. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

At the trial it was shown that the merchandise consists of hats known as harvest hats valued at less than $3 per dozen, similar in all material respects to those the classification of which was involved in *Caradine Hat Co.*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 69, C. D. 664). Upon the established facts and following the cited authority the merchandise was held dutiable as claimed.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                       TERAYON COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, INC.

                                  CERTIFICATION

In connection with the periodic report of Terayon Communication Systems, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10Q for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Carol Lustenader,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof,
solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States
Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

        (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
        15(d), as applicable, 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 Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, "filed" with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.


Date: November 14, 2002                 By: /s/ Carol Lustenader
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Carol Lustenader
                                            Chief Financial Officer
Part 1 Fiscal Year 2018 Reporting

SUPPLEMENT Section III

U.S. Standard General Ledger

Account Transaction Categories

TRANSACTION

CODE TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION

Bulletin No. 2018-05 III AC - 1 June 2018

A. Funding

100 - 399 Budgetary Resources Other Than Collections

400 - 699 Authority Transfers

700 - 799 Reimbursables and Other Income

B. Disbursements and Payables

100 - 299 Payments/Purchases

300 - 399 Commitments/Undelivered Orders/Expended Authority - Unpaid

400 - 599 Payables/Accrued Liabilities

600 - 699 Advances and Prepayments

C. Collections and Receivables

100 - 399 Receipts

400 - 599 Receivables/Accrued Revenue

600 - 799 Asset Sale and Disposition (Gains and Losses)

D. Adjustments/Writeoffs/Reclassification

100 - 299 Upward and Downward Adjustments

300 - 399 Prior-Period Adjustments

400 - 499 Writeoffs

500 - 799 Reclassification/Revaluation

E. Accruals/Nonbudgetary Transfers Other Than Disbursements and Collections

100 - 399 Accrual, Depreciation, Amortization, and Depletion

400 - 499 Accumulated and Allocated Costs Not in Categories Above

500 - 799 Transfers Without Budgetary Impact

F. Yearend

100 - 299 Preclosing Entries

300 - 499 Closing Entries

G. Memorandum Entries

100 - 299 All Memorandum Entries (Excluding Closing Memorandum Entries)

H. Other Specialized Transaction Entries

100 - 799 Other
No. 52250.

protests 767124-G, etc. (New York).

#### Samuel McCrudden & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Brian R. Ervine, certifythat:

 

1. I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Evolving Systems, Inc.;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and Iare responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

 

(a) Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

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

 

(c) Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

(b) Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date: August  10, 2004                             |
|----------------------------------------------------|
|                                               |
| /s/ BRIAN R.  ERVINE                               |   |
| Brian R.  Ervine                                   |
| Senior Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----