alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 58 (Friday, March 25, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16175-16176]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-06817]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9026-2]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General 
Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www2.epa.gov/nepa.

[[Page 16176]]

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EISs)
Filed 03/14/2016 Through 03/18/2016,
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public 
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment 
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-nepa-public/action/eis/search
EIS No. 20160063, Draft, BR, NM, Rio Grande Project, Continued 
Implementation of the 2008 Operating Agreement, Comment Period Ends: 
05/09/2016, Contact: Rhea Graham 505-462-3560.
EIS No. 20160064, Draft, USACE, WA, Puyallup River Basin, Flood Risk 
Management General Investigation, Comment Period Ends: 05/09/2016, 
Contact: Scott Long 206-764-6697.
EIS No. 20160065, Final, WAPA, CA, San Luis Transmission Project, 
Review Period Ends: 04/25/2016, Contact: Donald Lash 916-353-4048.

Amended Notices

EIS No. 20160017, Draft, USFS, AK, Shoreline II Outfitter/Guide 
(formerly Shoreline II Outfitter and Guide Management Plan), Comment 
Period Ends: 04/25/2016, Contact: Carey Case 907-772-3871. Revision to 
FR Notice Published 01/29/2016, Extending Comment Period from 03/14/
2016 to 04/25/2016.
EIS No. 20160021, Draft, USACE, NY, Mamaroneck and Sheldrake Rivers 
Flood Risk Management Village of Mamaroneck General Reevaluation, 
Comment Period Ends: 03/14/2016, Contact: Matthew Voisine 917-790-8718. 
Revision to FR Notice Published 01/29/2016, Extending Comment Period 
from 03/14/2016 to 03/30/2016.
EIS No. 20160037, Draft, USFS, WA, Colville National Forest Plan 
Revision, Comment Period Ends: 07/05/2016, Contact: Amy Dillon 509-684-
7211. Revision to FR Notice Published 02/19/2016, Extending Comment 
Period from 05/19/2016 to 07/05/2016.

    Dated: March 22, 2016.
Dawn Roberts,
Management Analyst, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal 
Activities.
[FR Doc. 2016-06817 Filed 3-24-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

LOGAN MURPHY, 

 

 Petitioner, 

 Case No. 2:18-cv-638 

 v. Judge George C. Smith 

 Magistrate Judge Vascura 

WARDEN, MADISON 

CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, 

 Respondent. 

OPINION AND ORDER 

 On July 10, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 

Rule 4 of the Rules governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts 

recommending that this action be dismissed. (ECF No. 3). Although the parties were advised of 

the right to file objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and of the 

consequences of failing to do so, no objections have been filed. 

 The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 3) is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. This 

action is hereby DISMISSED. 

 Petitioner has waived his right to appeal by failing to file objections. See Thomas v. Arn, 

474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). Therefore, the 

Court DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 

 s/ George C. Smith__________________ 

 GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Exhibit 32.1  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 NT Holding Corp. on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Alan Lew, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  1. The Report 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 result of operations of the Company.  Date:  April 14, 2008  /s/    Alan Lew Alan Lew, Chief Executive Officer
January 16, 1939

Honorable R. C. Xusrrlowhite Diatriot Attormp *, Lufkln, Texa8 ?.~

Deer Mr. Uurslewhiter * -OpinionHO. 115

. Ra: !?*rpotisB Law This OffIor la In reoelpt of your 1ett.m of Januaq 11, 1939, requesting an opinion a8 to whether the Nepotlam Law prohibits ths imiplOymnt **OS** the ss00nd wife of a manwhose now deoeased first wire wm3a eleter of the 

### wit0 0r a truster or.e sohool dlstriot.

Tourletter adviasa that there Is living lsaue of the proposed teaohm’s husband by hIa first wife, but thle la lmmaterlal, slnoe the proposed tsaohsr’cl husband evan during the lire or hle firatrtre was not related to the trustee wlthIn the term8 of Artiola 438 of the Penal Coda In that ROIIwho are not otherwise kin to eaoh otherdo not bdoome related**by** afriaity merely **by** marrying rlrterr. 8 0.J. 319. This preoludes the proposition thet thrman*8 seoond rite mm rolatrd by affinity. **Ae** raid by 0. f. Bleokley In Oentrrl RI eta. 00. t* Robert8, 91 C3a.Sl3, 18 8. t. 316s

*The groom and bride l eoh eomoa dthln the olrole of $ho other~r kin) but kin end kin em e&Ill no ~Oro related than thay were baroro.~ You are advised, therefore, thet maoheaploynmnt 18 BOt prohIbited by maid Artfolr 433. Youra wry truly ATToItNit?O’itmlUL01 TEXAS
AO 450 (Rev. 11/11) Judgment in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION

The court has ordered that (check one):

u the plaintiff (name) recover from the

defendant (name) the amount of

dollars ($ ), which includes prejudgment

interest at the rate of %, plus post judgment interest at the rate of % per annum, along with costs.

u the plaintiff recover nothing, the action be dismissed on the merits, and the defendant (name)

recover costs from the plaintiff (name)

.

u other:

.

This action was (check one):

u tried by a jury with Judge presiding, and the jury has

rendered a verdict.

u tried by Judge without a jury and the above decision

was reached.

u decided by Judge on a motion for

.

Date: CLERK OF COURT

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

10/20/2020

 Southern District of Ohio

Ala Nofan Makhamreh, et al.

3:18-CV-227

Attorney General , Department of Justice, et al.

✔ Judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiffs

✔ Walter H. Rice

Summary Judgment

CLERK OF COURT 

Case: 3:18-cv-00227-WHR Doc #: 33 Filed: 10/20/20 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 594
Atlanta Nonattainment Area Emissions Inventory for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS: Submitted February 2015 

> *Note: The Narrative and the Appendices not included in the narrative  are available   from the links below.*

- Atlanta Nonattainment Area Emissions Inventory for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS  Appendices   - Appendix A: Annual and Summer Day 2011 Emission Calculations for the 15 Atlanta Nonattainment Counties  Appendix E: Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport: Documentation for the CY 2011 Criteria Air Pollutant Emission InventoryAppendix F: Emission Summaries
- Appendix G: Additional Supporting Documentation- Georgia QAPP Documents  Appendix H: Additional Supporting Documentation- SESARM DocumentsAppendix I: Additional Supporting Documentation- Emission Inventory Technical Support Documents
AO 456s (Rev. 8/01) Notice

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Case Number: 1:00-cr-00093

V.

TODD BLAKE OLIVER Senior District Judge S. Arthur Spiegel

NOTICE

TAKE NOTICE that the SUPERVISED RELEASE REVOCATION HEARING (FINAL) in this case

has been RESET FROM 10/12/06 to the place, date, and time set forth below:

PLACE ROOM NO.

Potter Stewart U.S. Courthouse Courtroom #4, Room 842

100 East Fifth Street DATE AND TIME

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 OCTOBER 19, 2006 at 10:00 AM

JAMES BONINI, CLERK

s/Kevin Moser 

Kevin Moser

Case Manager

(513) 564-7620

cc: Tim Oakley, Esq., AUSA Richard Smith-Monahan, Esq. USMS Probation Pretrial Services

You can obtain all the pretrial procedures and forms used by the Judge by visiting our website at

www.ohsd.uscourts.gov

Click on Judges and then on Procedures and Forms above the Judge’s address.

If you do not have the ability to access the Website for the Judge’s procedures and forms, please contact me.

Case 1:00-cr-00093-SAS Document 58 Filed 10/04/2006 Page 1 of 1
**
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**ODYSSEY MARINE EXPLORATION, INC.**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the annual report on Form 10-K of Odyssey MarineExploration, Inc. for the period ending December 31, 2017, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

 
 (1)
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 aspects, the financial condition andresults of operations of Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. 

 

/s/ Jay A. Nudi

**Jay A. Nudi**

**Chief Financial Officer**

September 27, 2018 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Odyssey MarineExploration, Inc. and will be retained by Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request. 
**
CAUSE NO. 2014-50657

ELSA RODRIGUEZ

Plaintiff

, §

§ IN THE DISTRICT COURT

V. §

§ § HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

MARTIN, DISIERE, JEFFERSON, and WISDOM,

Defendant

. §
§ § 11 th JUDICIAL DISTRICT

PLAINTIFF ELSA RODRIGUEZ ’ S NOTICE OF APPEAL

TO THE HONORABLE CHRIS DANIEL, DISTRICT CLERK OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS:

Plaintiff, Elsa Rodriguez

, under Tex. R. App. P. 25.1, gives notic e of appeal

to the First or Fourteenth Court of Appeals sitting in Houston, Texas from the

Honorable Judge Stone ’ s Order and Amended Order granting the Defendant ’ s

Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Chapter 27 of the Texas Civil Practices & Remedies

Code, and judgment dismissing all of Plaintiff ’ s claims signed June 10, 2015, as

well as any and all rulings or orders adverse to the Plaintiff.

Respectfully submitted,

WATTS &COMPANY LAWYERS, LTD

/S/ Larry Watts Larry Watts

SBN 20981000

P.O. Box 2214 Missouri City, Texas 77459 Telephone: (281) 431-1500 Facsimile: (877) 797-4055 Email: wattstrial@gmail.com Attorney for Plaintiffs 6/10/2015 6:55:33 PM Chris Daniel - District Clerk Harris County

Envelope No. 5630269 By: Phyllis Washington
Filed: 6/10/2015 6:55:33 PM

ACCEPTED
01-15-00531-CV
FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS
7/2/2015 1:08:23 PM
CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERKCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Larry Watts, certify that a true and correct copy of this document has been served on opposing counsel via efiling on this, the 10th of June , 201 5

.

Chris Daniel

District Clerk Harris County

P.O Box 4651

Houston , Texas 77 210

- 4651 Main Office: ( 713 ) 75 5

- 7300

Christopher A

. Prine

Clerk of the Court

First Court of Appeals

3 01 Fannin ST

Harris , TX 77002

- 2066 (713)274

- 2700 Fax: (713)755

- 8131

R ichard A. Morris Rogers, Morris, & Grover 5718 Westheimer Road, Suite 1200

Houston , TX 77057 (713)960

- 6000

F ax: (713 ) 960

- 6025

/S/ Larry Watts Larry Watts
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel., :

JOHN N. KRAMER, D.D.S. : Judge Susan J. Dlott

:

Plaintiffs, : Case No. 1:18-cv-373

:

v. : 

:

ROBERT A. DOYLE Jr., D.M.D. et al., : 

:

Defendants :

_________________________________________ :

THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION

TO NASG’S MOTION TO DISMISS BASED UPON PUBLIC DISCLOSURE

Comes Now, the United States of America, by counsel, and states that 

pursuant to the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3730(e)(4)(A), the government is 

opposed to Defendant North American Dental Group’s (NADG) Motion to Dismiss 

pursuant to the False Claims Act’s public disclosure bar. (Doc. 49, at PAGEID ## 589-

91.)

Under the False Claims Act, the Government is afforded an automatic veto of 

a motion to dismiss on public disclosure grounds. 31 U.S.C. § 3730(e)(4)(A). It is not 

necessary for the Government to explain its reasons for exercising its veto; rather, 

the Government may simply state its opposition. United States ex rel. Berntsen v. 

Prime Healthcare Servs., No. 11-CV-8214 PJW, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188722, at *5-

9 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2014); see also United States ex rel. Conroy v. Select Med. Corp., 

Case: 1:18-cv-00373-DRC Doc #: 53 Filed: 01/23/20 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 599
2

211 F. Supp. 3d 1132, 1152 (S.D. Ind. 2016); United States of America ex rel Baker v. 

Community Health Sys., Inc., et al., No. 5-279 WJ/ACT, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 

188778 (D. N.M. May 14, 2014).

Respectfully, the United States is opposed to NASG’s Motion to Dismiss based 

upon the False Claims Act’s public disclosure bar. (Doc. 49, at PAGEID ## 589-91)

Respectfully submitted,

DAVID M. DEVILLERS

United States Attorney

s/ William B. King II 

WILLIAM B. KING II (094046)

Assistant United States Attorney

221 East Fourth Street, Suite 400

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Office: (513) 684-3711

Fax: (513) 684-6385

E-mail: Bill.King@usdoj.gov

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of the foregoing The Government’s Notice of Opposition to 

NASG’s Motion to Dismiss Based Upon Public Disclosure was served upon all parties 

of record by CM/ECF Notice of Electronic Filing, this 23rd day of January, 2020. 

s/ William B. King II

William B. King II (094046)

Assistant United States Attorney

Case: 1:18-cv-00373-DRC Doc #: 53 Filed: 01/23/20 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 600
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 7, 2019

No. 04-19-00332-CV

Lee B. WHEELER, Trustee of the L& P Children's Trust and Nancy Wheeler Plumlee,

Appellants

v.

SAN MIGUEL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.,

Appellees

From the 36th Judicial District Court, McMullen County, Texas

Trial Court No. M-17-0027-CV-A

Honorable Starr Boldrick Bauer, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The trial court clerk has filed a clerk’s record. However, the clerk’s record does not 

comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.5(a), which lists the documents that must be 

included in the clerk’s record “[u]nless the parties designate the filings in the appellate record by 

agreement under Rule 34.2.” TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5. Rule 34.5(a) provides that in civil cases, the 

documents to be included in the clerk’s record are the following:

(1) all pleadings on which the trial was held; 

(2) the court’s docket sheet, 

(3) the court’s charge and the jury’s verdict, or the court’s findings of 

fact and conclusions of law;

(4) the court’s judgment or other order that is being appealed;

(5) any request for findings of fact and conclusions of law, any postjudgment motion, and the court’s order on the motion;

(6) the notice of appeal;

(7) any formal bill of exception;

(8) any request for a reporter’s record, including any statement of 

points or issues under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.6(c);

(9) any request for preparation of the clerk’s record;

(10) a certified bill of costs including the cost of preparing the clerk’s 

record, showing credits for payments made; and

(11) any filing that a party designates to have included in the record.
In this appeal, the clerk’s record does not contain all the pleadings on which trial was 

held. Specifically, the clerk’s record does not include Plaintiffs’ First Amended Original Petition, 

which was filed on June 6, 2017. We ORDER the trial court clerk to file a supplemental clerk’s 

record on or before June 17, 2019 containing the Plaintiffs’ First Amended Original Petition. 

_________________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 7th day of June, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
#### Ludovic S. King v. Duncan McKenzie.

*Justices’ courts*— Unauthorized *appearance.*

If a justice, whether properly or not, has erased his docket entry of the appearance of a defendant, he ought not to proceed in the case without giving notice of his purpose to the defendant,, or the attorney who had assumed to appear for him.

*462Costs were withheld upon the affirmance oí a judgment reversing the action of a justice in proceeding ex parte in a case in which he would have had a right to proceed if he had not previously erased his entry of defendant’s appearance.

Error to St. Clair. (Stevens, J.)

October 2.

October 10.

Attachment. Defendant brings error.

Affirmed.

*Atkinson c& Stevenson*for appellant.

*Ohm. K. Dodge*for appellee.

Cooley, J.

McKenzie sued King by attachment in justice’s court, but failed to obtain personal service. The writ was returnable on February 27,1882. On that day McKenzie’s attorney, understanding or' supposing that Mr. Dodge, an attorney of this Court, was to appear for King, procured from him the following paper: “ Case of McKenzie v. King adjourned without prejudice to 28, 9 a. m.” This was signed by Dodge, and presented at the proper time to the justice, who, understanding it to be a request addressed to him for the continuance of the case, continued it accordingly. On the next day, at the hour named, the plaintiff appeared and also Dodge, and by consent the cause was hold open until two o’clock. The proper entries were made on the justice’s docket on both occasions to show an appearance for the defendant by Dodge, as his attorney. Before the hour of two had arrived, Dodge went again to the justice’s office, and told that officer he was not authorized to appear for King, and insisted that the entry of his ap-pearaiice should be erased; which was done. When the hour for calling the case arrived, the plaintiff appeared, but there was no appearance for defendant. When the plaintiff understood what had been done respecting the appearance by Dodge, he demanded that the entry be restored *•*and this was done, and the cause heard ex parte, and judgment given for the plaintiff. Defendant, by Dodge as his attorney, then removed the case by certiorari to the circuit court, where the judgment was reversed.

*463The justice had a right to act upon the appearance of Dodge, and proceed in the case; and if he had not erased his entries on the docket we should see no reason for disturbing his judgment; but striking those out was a concession that the case could not further proceed on the appearance which had previously been entered; and though the justice may have erred in this, we can see much reason for the view of the circuit judge that the plaintiff should not have proceeded further in the case without notifying the defendant, or the attorney who had assumed to act for him, of his intention so to do.

"We shall therefore not disturb the judgment of reversal 5 but we do not think the case is one calling for any costs in this Court. No costs will therefore be awarded.

The other Justices concurred.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 10 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 10

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the remains of the late United States Capitol Police Officer Brian 
D. Sicknick shall be permitted to lie in honor in the rotunda of the 
Capitol from February 2, 2021, through February 3, 2021, and the 
Architect of the Capitol, under the direction of the Speaker of the 
House of Representatives and the President

              

 pro tempore of the Senate, shall take all necessary steps for the 
accomplishment of that purpose.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 1, 2021.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
117th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                            H. CON. RES. 10

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Permitting the remains of the late United States Capitol Police Officer 
    Brian D. Sicknick to lie in honor in the rotunda of the Capitol.
```
Case: 1:18-cv-00019-MRB-KLL Doc #: 24 Filed: 03/13/19 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 309
Case: 1:18-cv-00019-MRB-KLL Doc #: 24 Filed: 03/13/19 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 310
Case: 2:18-cv-00692-MHW-EPD Doc #: 95 Filed: 06/13/19 Page: 1 of 2  PAGEID #: 584

Case: 2:18-cv-00692-MHW-EPD Doc #: 95 Filed: 06/13/19 Page: 2 of 2  PAGEID #: 585
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF LINCARE HOLDINGS INC. FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1998,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           5,980
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   83,943
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,479
<INVENTORY>                                      1,818
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                94,209
<PP&E>                                         212,561
<DEPRECIATION>                                  89,532
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 505,707
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           42,769
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           582
<OTHER-SE>                                     442,580
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   505,707
<SALES>                                        231,422
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               231,422
<CGS>                                           36,700
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   36,700
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               131,705
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,777
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 216
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 63,051
<INCOME-TAX>                                    24,149
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             38,902
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    38,902
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.66
        

</TABLE>