alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.C6

               Report of Independent Certified Public Accountants

Stockholders and Directors
Advanced Financial, Inc. and Subsidiaries

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Advanced
Financial, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of March 31, 2002 and the related
consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' deficit, and cash flows for
the year then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the
management of the Company. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards
in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free
of material misstatements. An audit includes examining, on a test basis,
evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An
audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant
estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of Advanced Financial, Inc and
Subsidiaries as of March 31, 2002 and the results of their operations and their
cash flows for the year then ended, in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles in the United States.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming
that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note N to the
financial statements, the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations
and is dependent upon the continued sale of its securities or obtaining debt
financing for funds to meet its cash requirements. These factors raise
substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern.
Management's plans with regard to these matters are also described in Note N.
The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from
the outcome of this uncertainty.






Weaver & Martin, LLC
Kansas City, Missouri
October 27, 2003
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 13

- 00648

- CV

Mark J. CARRILLO

, Appellant

v.

DEACON RECRUITING, INC. and Deacon Professional Services, LLC,

Appellees

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013

- CI

- 11039

Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE STONE

, JUSTICE ANGELINI , AND JUSTICE MARION

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED FOR

WANT OF PROSECUTION. Costs of the app eal are taxed against appellant.

SIGNED October 23, 2013.

_________________________________ Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
# C_2005297EN.01000201.xml

| 29.11.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 297/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.11.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/2

---

Final report of the Hearing Officer in Case COMP/M.3625 — Blackstone/Acetex

(pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings — OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21)

(pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings — OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21)

(2005/C 297/02)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 20 January 2005, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Celanese Corporation (‘Celanese’) controlled by Blackstone Crystal Holdings Capital Partners, Cayman Islands (‘Blackstone’) acquires control within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation of the whole of the undertaking Acetex Corporation, Canada (‘Acetex’) by way of purchase of shares.

1

Having examined the information submitted by the parties to the proposed merger and conducted an initial market investigation, the Commission concluded that the notified operation raised serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market and with the EEA Agreement. On 10 March 2005, the Commission therefore initiated proceedings in accordance with Article 6(1)(c) of the Merger Regulation.

Following a detailed market investigation, the Commission services concluded that the proposed concentration did not significantly impede effective competition on the markets concerned by the case. Accordingly, no statement of objections was sent to the parties.

In the course of the market investigation, the parties were granted access to key documents under section 7.2 of DG Competition's best practices on the conduct of merger control proceedings.

The case does not call for any particular comments as regards rights to be heard.

Brussels, 29 June 2005.

Karen WILLIAMS

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Subtropical Horticulture Research: Miami, FL
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Southeast Area Miami, Florida Subtropical Horticulture Research People & Locations







Daniela  Menendez

                                                                (Karl)
                        Subtropical Horticulture Research

                        




                        
                        BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE TECHNICIAN
                        Phone:    
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
1

Rafey S. Balabanian, ILB #6285687*

rbalabanian@edelson.com

Eve-Lynn J. Rapp, ILB #6300632*

erapp@edelson.com

Lily Hough, SBN #315277*

lhough@edelson.com

EDELSON PC

123 Townsend Street, Suite 100

San Francisco, California 94107

Tel: 415.212.9300

Fax: 415.373.9435

Simon Franzini, Cal. Bar #287631*

simon@dovel.com

Gregory S. Dovel, Cal. Bar #135387*

greg@dovel.com

Jonas Jacobson, Cal. Bar #269912*

jonas@dovel.com

DOVEL & LUNER LLP

201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600

Santa Monica, California 90401

Tel: (310) 656-7066

Fax: (310) 656-7069

Scott F. Kocher, OSB#015088

Stephen J. Voorhees, OSB#150595

FORUM LAW GROUP

811 S.W. Naito Parkway, Suite 420

Portland, Oregon 97204

Tel: 503.445.2120

Fax: 503.445.2120

* Admitted pro hac vice

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON

LORI WAKEFIELD, on behalf of 

themselves and a class of others similarly 

situated,

 Plaintiff,

v.

VISALUS, INC., a Nevada Corporation,

Defendant.

No. 3:15-cv-01857-BR

DECLARATION OF EVE-LYNN J. 

RAPP IN SUPPORT OF 

PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO 

CONTINUE

Case 3:15-cv-01857-SI Document 183 Filed 01/18/19 Page 1 of 2
DECLARATION OF EVE-LYNN J. RAPP 2

I, Eve-Lynn J. Rapp, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, hereby declare as follows:

1. I am an attorney admitted to practice law in the State of Illinois, over the age of 

18, and fully competent to make this Declaration. This Declaration is based upon my personal 

knowledge, except where expressly noted otherwise.

2. I am the Hiring Partner at Edelson PC, the law firm that has been retained to 

represent the named plaintiff in this matter, Lori Wakefield (“Plaintiff”) and appointed as Class 

Counsel.

3. I have been actively working on this case since its inception and was actively 

working on this matter in September 2018 when a new trial date was set. Since that time, and—

other than vaguely mentioning settlement discussions as a reason for continuing the trial during 

the parties’ meet and confer on the underlying motion—up until this afternoon, ViSalus had not 

raised the topic of settlement with Plaintiff’s counsel for many months. 

4. Nor had ViSalus taken any concrete steps in that time to move the parties toward 

settlement. It had not not proposed a mediation; had not reached out to request a settlement 

meeting; had not requested or provided a settlement offer; and had not reached out to counsel for 

Plaintiff to discuss settlement in any way. 

5. This afternoon, just as Plaintiff’s counsel was finalizing their response to 

ViSalus’s motion to continue, a representative of ViSalus called me to discuss, among other 

things, settlement. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on this the 18th day of January, 2019 at San Francisco, California.

/s/ Eve-Lynn J. Rapp 

Case 3:15-cv-01857-SI Document 183 Filed 01/18/19 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

          <ARTICLE> 5
          <CIK> 0000825410
          <NAME> LANDAUER, INC.
          <MULTIPLIER> 1,000
                 
          <S>                             <C>
          <PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
          <FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1995
          <PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1994
          <PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
          <CASH>                                           1,915
          <SECURITIES>                                     6,456
          <RECEIVABLES>                                    7,123
          <ALLOWANCES>                                       151
          <INVENTORY>                                        955
          <CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,324
          <PP&E>                                          16,858
          <DEPRECIATION>                                   9,104
          <TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  38,749
          <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,964
          <BONDS>                                              0
          <COMMON>                                           848
          <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
          <PREFERRED>                                          0
          <OTHER-SE>                                      22,937
          <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    38,749
          <SALES>                                         34,032
          <TOTAL-REVENUES>                                34,032
          <CGS>                                            9,901
          <TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,901
          <OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
          <LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
          <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
          <INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,046
          <INCOME-TAX>                                     5,985
          <INCOME-CONTINUING>                             10,061
          <DISCONTINUED>                                       0
          <EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
          <CHANGES>                                            0
          <NET-INCOME>                                    10,061
          <EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.19
          <EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.19
                  
          
</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PORTLAND DIVISION 

DANICA LOVE BROWN, individually 

and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 

No. 3:15-cv-01370-MO 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

STORED VALUE CARDS, INC. (d/b/a 

NUMI FINANCIAL); and CENTRAL 

NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST 

COMP ANY, ENID, OKLAHOMA, 

Defendants. 

MOSMAN,J. 

JUDGMENT 

Based on my Order [190] GRANTING Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, IT 

IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

of August, 2018. 

Chief United States District Judge 

I-JUDGMENT 

Case 3:15-cv-01370-MO Document 191 Filed 08/02/18 Page 1 of 1
STATE OFLOUISIANA 

### VERSUS MILTON WILSON NO. 

### 2023 KW 0803 

### NOVEMBER6, 2023
In Re: Milton Wilson, applying for supervisory writs, 22nd

Judicial District Court, Parish of 

### St. 

### Tammany, No. 413805. BEFORE: THERIOT, PENZATO, AND GREENE, JJ.

WRIT DENIED. MRT AHP HG

COURT OFAPPEAL, 

### FIRST CIRCUIT
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 110 Media Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on April ___, 2006 (the "Report"), I,
William A. Mobley, Jr., 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 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 result of operations
            of the Company.


/s/ William A. Mobley, Jr.
-----------------------------------------
William A. Mobley, Jr.
Chief Executive Officer
April 18, 2006

A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Service Wing Healthcare, Inc

12700 EI Camino Real, Suite 300

San Diego CA 92130

Check No.: 2189

Pay Stub Detail

PAY DATE:01/01/2017

NET PAY:$8,091 .60

Michael J. Kurgan

6538 Collins Ave, #288

Miami FL 33141

Check No.: 2189

EMPLOYER

Service Wing Healthcare, Inc

12790 El Camino Real, Suite 300

San Diego CA 921 30

PAY PERIOD

Period Beginning

Period Eliding:

Pay Date:

12/16/2016

01/01/2017

01/01/2017

EMPLOYEE

Michael J. Kurgan

6538 Collins Ave, #288

Miami FL 33141

SS#: ...1113

ICO >15D.*r~ W *

NET PAY; / $8,091.60

MEMO; 'J?

s

Hours Rate Current "YTP

- - 10,416,67 260,750.00

ITIONS Current YTD PAY

Salary

TAXES Current

2,080.27 93,783.39

0.00 7,686,40

244.80 4,327.63

YTD

Federal income Tax

Social Security

Medicare

CA Income Tax

SUMMARY Current YTD

BBS $10,416.67

$2,325,07

Total Pay

Taxes

Deductions 0.00 0.00 $0.00 $0300

Net Pay $8,091.60

i

Exhibit K - Page 1 of 1

Case 6:14-cv-01192-MC Document 94-11 Filed 11/20/17 Page 1 of 1
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-61138

Summary Calendar

JOHN STEPHAN PARISIE

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES INC, Located in St Louis, Missouri;

PHARMACORRX

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 4:05-CV-40

Before KING, DAVIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

John Stephan Parisie, Mississippi prisoner # K8188, filed the instant 42

U.S.C. § 1983 suitto seek redress for alleged acts of deliberate indifference to his

medical needs while incarcerated at the Mississippi State Penitentiary in

Parchman, Mississippi. Parisie appeals the district court’s grant of summary

judgment in favor of Correctional Medical Services, Inc. (CMS), PharmaCorr,

L.L.C. (PharmaCorr), the dismissal of Dr. Juan Santos, and the dismissal of

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

March 7, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 06-61138

2

Parisie’s § 1983 suit. Parisie has also filed a motion to supplement his brief on

appeal to add certain exhibits.

Parisie asserts that PharmaCorr was deliberately indifferent to his

medical needs by failing to timely refill his prescriptions and that CMS and its

agent, Dr. Santos, also acted with deliberate indifference in failing to timely

provide medical treatment. He asserts that he suffered substantial harm as a

result of the defendants’ acts of deliberate indifference.

Our review of the record reveals no error in connection with the district

court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of PharmaCorr and CMS. See

Cousin v. Small, 325 F.3d 627, 637 (5th Cir. 2003); FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c). The

record evidence does not show that PharmaCorr acted with deliberate

indifference in failing to process Parisie’s requests. Because Parisie does not

challenge the district court’s determination that CMS cannot be vicariously

liable for the actions of agents, he has abandoned the issue on appeal. See

Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.

1987); Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).

Further, the undisputed medical evidence does not demonstrate that Dr.

Santos acted with deliberate indifference or that Parisie suffered any substantial

harm as a result of the alleged delay in medical treatment. See Farmer v.

Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994); Mendoza v. Lynaugh, 989 F.2d 191, 195 (5th

Cir. 1993). The facts underlying Parisie’s claim do not clearly evince the need

for the medical care he claims Dr. Santos denied him. See Johnson v. Treen, 759

F.2d 1236, 1238 (5th Cir. 1985). Parisie has failed to show any error in

connection with the district court’s judgment. Accordingly, that judgment is

AFFIRMED. Parisie’s motion to supplement his brief is DENIED.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1178

In re: PHILLIP O’BRIANT,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:18-cv-02705-GJH)

Submitted: June 3, 2019 Decided: June 11, 2019

Before MOTZ, AGEE, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Phillip O’Briant, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Phillip O’Briant petitions for a writ of mandamus, contending the district court 

erroneously denied his request to compel action by state judges. He asks this court to 

order the district court to grant his request. “[M]andamus is a drastic remedy that must 

be reserved for extraordinary situations.” In re Murphy-Brown, LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 

(4th Cir. 2018) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). “Courts provide 

mandamus relief only when (1) petitioner ‘ha[s] no other adequate means to attain the 

relief [he] desires’; (2) petitioner has shown a ‘clear and indisputable’ right to the 

requested relief; and (3) the court deems the writ ‘appropriate under the circumstances.’” 

Id. (quoting Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Court, 542 U.S. 367, 380-81 (2004)). The writ of 

mandamus is not a substitute for appeal. Will v. United States, 389 U.S. 90, 97 (1967); In 

re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). 

We conclude that O’Briant fails to show that he is entitled to mandamus relief. 

Accordingly, although we grant him leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny his

petition for a writ of mandamus. 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
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Pest Management Research: Sidney, MT
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    NPARL
                        Northern Plains Agricultural Research Laboratory
                                    Agricultural Systems Research Unit
                                    Grasshoppers: Their Biology, Identification and ManagementSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Sidney, Montana Northern Plains Agricultural Research Laboratory Pest Management Research PMRU Docs Grasshoppers: Their Biology, Identification and Management: Outbreak and Survey Info Forecast Maps





- NPARL Home
- PMRU Home
- ASRU Home
- Site Highlights
- Outbreak and Survey Info
- ID Tools | Apps
- Grasshopper Management
- IPM Handbook
- USDA Research | Contact Info

Outbreak Info: Grasshopper Forecast 2023headline bar /ARSUserFiles/30320505/2023 GH hazard map.jpg < Previous MapBack to Outbreak Info >Next Map >


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov