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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL DATA EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997
INCLUDED IN PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          51,490
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,420
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                71,018
<PP&E>                                          11,306
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,720
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  88,687
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,767
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,400
<OTHER-SE>                                      67,080
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    88,687
<SALES>                                         20,979
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,979
<CGS>                                           13,086
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   17,227
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,410
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,588
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,822
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,822
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .60
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .59
        

</TABLE>
Derek GRAY, petitioner, v. MISSISSIPPI.

No. 12-9540.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi denied.
#### Oscar D. GUZMAN-SANTANA, Petitioner—Appellant, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General; et al., Respondents—Appellees.

No. 03-56074.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 22, 2004.*

Decided April 26, 2004.

Raul M. Montes, Esq., Montes & Montes, San Diego, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Samuel W. Bettwy, Esq., USSD — Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Respondents-Appellees.

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, RYMER, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Oscar D. Guzman-Santana, a native and citizen of El Salvador, appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habe*494as petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, we review de novo, *see Miles v. Prunty,*187 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir.1999) and we affirm.

Guzman-Santana contends that a waiver of inadmissibility pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(h) violates his right to equal protection as an immigrant who had been admitted to this country as a legal permanent resident prior to committing an aggravated felony. This contention is unpersuasive. *See Taniguchi v. Schultz,*303 F.3d 950, 957-58 (9th Cir.2002) (holding that there is a rational basis for denying the waiver to aggravated felon LPRs but not to other aliens).

Guzman-Santana next claims a due process violation because the immigration judge failed to inform him of the possibility for relief. This contention lacks merit. *See United States v. Garzor-Sanchez,*217 F.3d 806, 810 (9th Cir.2000) (stating that an immigration judge is only required to inform the respondent of statutory grounds for relief from deportation found in the immigration laws); *see also LaritaMartinez v. INS,*220 F.3d 1092, 1095 (9th Cir.2000) (requiring a showing of prejudice in order to prevail on a due process claim).

We decline to address Guzman-Santana’s general international law contention raised for the first time in his traverse. *See Cacoperdo v. Demosthenes,*37 F.3d 504, 507 (9th Cir.1994) (“A Traverse is not the proper pleading to raise additional grounds for relief.”).

Finally, Guzman-Santana’s contention that the BIA’s streamlining procedure violates due process is foreclosed by *Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft,*350 F.3d 845, 850-51 (9th Cir.2003). His argument that the holding in *Falcon Carriche*does not apply to the specific facts of his case is frivolous.

AFFIRMED.1

**

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

1

. To the extent that petitioner argues that this panel should overrule current Ninth Circuit case law, that is not possible. *See Benny v. U.S. Parole Commission,*295 F.3d 977, 983 (9th Cir.2002) ("We are bound by decisions of prior panels unless an en banc decision, Supreme Court decision or subsequent legislation undermines those decisions.”).
# C_2018314EN.01000301.xml

| 6.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 314/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 314/3

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 4 September 2018

adopting the Council’s position on draft amending budget No 4 of the European Union for the financial year 2018

(2018/C 314/04)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 314 thereof, in conjunction with the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a thereof,

Having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (1) and in particular Article 41 thereof,

Whereas:

| — | the Union’s budget for the financial year 2018 was definitively adopted on 30 November 2017 (2), |
| --- | --- |

—

the Union’s budget for the financial year 2018 was definitively adopted on 30 November 2017 (2),

| — | on 31 May 2018, the Commission submitted a proposal containing draft amending budget No 4 to the general budget for the financial year 2018, |
| --- | --- |

—

on 31 May 2018, the Commission submitted a proposal containing draft amending budget No 4 to the general budget for the financial year 2018,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

The Council’s position on draft amending budget No 4 of the European Union for the financial year 2018 was adopted on 4 September 2018.

The full text can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the Council’s website: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/

Done at Brussels, 4 September 2018.

For the Council

The President

G. BLÜMEL

---

(1)  OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ L 57, 28.2.2018, p. 1.

2

---
Stephen JACKSON, petitioner, v. Tom FELKER, Warden.

No. 12-7395.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Vincent GLOVER, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 12-8928.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, 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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SERGIO CASTILLO,

Plaintiff,

v.

CONVERGENT OUTSOURCING, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00919-WHO 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL UPON 

SETTLEMENT

Re: Dkt. No. 30

The parties to the action, by and through their counsel, have advised the Court that they have 

agreed to a settlement. 

IT IS ORDERED that this matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and any hearings 

scheduled in this matter are VACATED. It is further ordered that if any party certifies to this Court, 

with proper notice to opposing counsel within ninety (90) days from the date below, that settlement 

has not in fact occurred, this order shall be vacated and this cause shall be restored to the calendar for 

further proceedings. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 3, 2017

______________________________________

WILLIAM H. ORRICK

United States District Judge
25978 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 93 / Monday, May 15, 1995 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Indian Gaming

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of approved Tribal/State

Compact.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 2710,

of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of

1988 (Pub. L. 100–497), the Secretary of

the Interior shall publish, in the Federal

Register, notice of approved Tribal/State

Compacts for the purpose of engaging in

Class III (casino) gambling on Indian

reservations. The Assistant Secretary—

Indian Affairs, Department of the

Interior, through her delegated

authority, has approved the Compact

Between the Pueblo of Nambe and the

State of New Mexico, which was

executed on March 1, 1995.

DATES: This action is effective May 15,

1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George T. Skibine, Director, Indian

Gaming Management Staff, Bureau of

Indian Affairs, Washington, DC 20240,

(202) 219–4068.

Dated: April 24, 1995.

Ada E. Deer,

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. 95–11759 Filed 5–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–02–M

Indian Gaming

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of approved Tribal/State

Compact.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 2710,

of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of

1988 (Pub. L. 100–497), the Secretary of

the Interior shall publish, in the Federal

Register, notice of approved Tribal/State

Compacts for the purpose of engaging in

Class III (casino) gambling on Indian

reservations. The Assistant Secretary—

Indian Affairs, Department of the

Interior, through her delegated

authority, has approved the Compact

Between the Pueblo of Acoma and the

State of New Mexico, which was

executed on February 15, 1995.

DATES: This action is effective May 15,

1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George T. Skibine, Director, Indian

Gaming Management Staff, Bureau of

Indian Affairs, Washington, D.C. 20240,

(202) 219–4068.

Dated: April 24, 1995.

Ada E. Deer,

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. 95–11760 Filed 5–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–02–M
Order entered September 5, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-01146-CV

IN RE LOUIS T. SHIELL II, Relator

On Appeal from the 298th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-12-06516

ORDER

The Court has before it real party in interest’s September 3, 2013 unopposed motion to 

extend time to file response. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS real party in 

interest to file his response by September 16, 2013.

/s/ KERRY P. FITZGERALD 

JUSTICE
Michael Alonza RUFUS, petitioner, v. GEORGIA, et al.

No. 12-9573.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 10, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
----

|                                      |   | Three Months Ended  |   |   | Three Months Ended  |   |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|---------------------|--------|--------|---------------------|--------|
|                                      |   | March 31, 2009 |   |   | March 31, 2008 |   |
|                                      |   |                |   |   |                |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|                                      |   |                |   |   | Earnings            |   |   |   |   |   | Earnings |   |
|                                      |   | Shares              |   |   | Per Share           |   |   | Shares |   |   | Per Share |   |
|                                      |   | (in Thousands)      |   |   | (in Thousands)      |   |
|                                      |   |                |   |   |                |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Basic Weighted Average Shares Outstanding |   |                | 7,203  |   |                | $      | 0.11 |   |   |   | 7,192 |   |   | $ | 0.31 |   |
|                                      |   |                |   |   |                |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|                                      |   |                |   |   |                |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Diluted                                   |   |                |   |   |                |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Average Shares Outstanding                |   |                | 7,203  |   |                |   |   |   |   |   | 7,192 |   |   |   |   |   |
| Common Stock Equivalents                  |   |                | 0      |   |                |   |   |   |   |   | 0 |   |   |   |   |   |
|                                      |   |                | 7,203  |   |                | $      | 0.11 |   |   |   | 7,192 |   |   | $ | 0.31 |   |

----
Ipolito CAMPOS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9512.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Case 3:05-cr-00292-MHP Document 65 Filed 05/01/06 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Stephen B. Waters, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of National Property Investors 6;

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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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)) for the small business issuer and have:



(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

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



(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  November 9, 2007

/s/Stephen B. Waters

Stephen B. Waters

Vice President of NPI Equity Investments, Inc., equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership
Exhibit 23.2








Consent of Independent Auditors








The Board of Directors


Kennedy-Wilson Holdings, Inc.:


We consent to the use of our report dated March 31, 2014, with respect to the statements of operations, partners’ capital, and cash flows of Kennedy Wilson Real Estate Fund IV, L.P. for the year ended December 31, 2013, and the related notes to the financial statements, incorporated by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-174742, No. 333-175002, No. 333-175559, No. 333-184752, and No. 333-192059) on Form S-3, the registration statements (No. 333-164928, No. 333-182269, and No. 333-197492) on Form S-8, the registration statement (No. 333-164926) on Form S-1/A and the registration statement (No. 333-186690) on Form S-4 of Kennedy-Wilson Holdings, Inc. in reliance upon the report of KPMG LLP, independent auditors, which report appears in amendment no. 1 to the December 31, 2015 annual report on Form 10-K of Kennedy-Wilson Holdings, Inc.








/s/ KPMG LLP


Los Angeles, California


March 25, 2016
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

WAYMO LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No.3:17-cv-00939-WHA 

NOTICE REGARDING VIDEO RECORDING 

A request has been made to video record the May 4, 2017 Motion for Preliminary 

Injunction in this case pursuant to General Order 65, Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. 

( ) All parties have consented to the video recording of the proceeding; unless otherwise 

ordered by the presiding judge, the proceeding will be video recorded as part of the Pilot 

Project. See cand.uscourts.gov/cameras for more information. 

 

(X) At least one party has opposed the request to video record and/or the Court has denied the 

request; the proceeding will not be video recorded. 

Dated: 3/20/2017 Susan Y. Soong, Clerk of Court 

 Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 65 Filed 03/20/17 Page 1 of 1
Michael Anthony CHERRY, aka Pops, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9632.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
George Daniel SMITH, Jr., petitioner, v. Rick THALER, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 12-8990.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

**In the Matter of**

**FREDA LYNN PEPPER**

**PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT FROM ADMINISTRATIVE SUSPENSION**  **: :**  **: :**  **: :**  **: No. 207 DB 2014 (No. 17 RST 2015)** 

**Attorney Registration No. 62193** 

**(Montgomery County)**

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 25 th**  **day of February, 2015, the Report and Recommendatio n of**  **Disciplinary Board Member dated February 13, 2015, is a pproved and it is ORDERED**  **that Freda Lynn Pepper, who has been on Administrativ e Suspension, has never been**  **suspended or disbarred, and has demonstrated that she has the moral qualifications,**  **competency and learning in law required for admission t o practice in the**  **Commonwealth, shall be and is, hereby reinstated to act ive status as a member of the**  **Bar of this Commonwealth. The expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation**  **and processing of this matter shall be paid by the Petit ioner.**
EXHIBIT 31  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Brad Houtkin, President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Arbor Entech 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(s) 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)) for the registrant and have:  a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure the material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly through the period in which this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluations, and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5) The Registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and to the Audit Committee of the registrants Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):  a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operations of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.   Date: September 11, 2009  /s/ Brad Houtkin. Brad Houtkin President and Chief Financial Officer