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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDCATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 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>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          11,679
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  155,511
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,348
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               179,107
<PP&E>                                          25,581
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 458,324
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           59,926
<BONDS>                                        152,366
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           327
<OTHER-SE>                                     237,010
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   458,324
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               216,948
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  167,093
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                37,634
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,203
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,923
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,168
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,755
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,755
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.18
        

</TABLE>
II

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1829

To suspend temporarily the duty on O-(6-chloro-3-phenyl-4-pyridazinyl)-Soctyl-carbonothioate.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 24, 1998

Mr. HELMS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on O-(6-chloro-3-phenyl4-pyridazinyl)-S-octyl-carbonothioate.

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

3 SECTION 1. O-(6-CHLORO-3-PHENYL-4-PYRIDAZINYL)-S4 OCTYL-CARBONOTHIOATE.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

8 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.38.08 O-(6-chloro-3-phenyl-4-

pyridazinyl)-S-octylcarbonothioate (CAS No.

55512–33–9) (provided for in

subheading 3808.30.15) ....... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/02 ’’.
2

•S 1829 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to articles entered, or

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after

4 the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.

Æ
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra,

Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk November 7, 2012

s1031 

# Order

November 7, 2012

144721

SCOTT and JEANNE WOODBURY,

Plaintiffs,

and

CENTER WOODS, INC.,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 144721

COA: 297819

Saginaw CC: 09

- 006758

- CH

RES

- CARE PREMIER, INC.,

Defendant

- Appellee,

and

RUTH AVERILL,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 19, 2012

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall

include among the issues to be briefed : (1) whether the common law doctrines of de

facto corporation, see, e.g., Bergy Bros, Inc v Zeeland Feeder Pi g, Inc

, 415 Mich 286

(198 2), and corporation by estoppel, see, e.g., Stott v Stott Realty Co , 288 Mich 35, 48

(1939), survived enactment of the Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2101 et seq. ; (2)

if so, whether plaintiff corporation, Center Woods, Inc., which was administratively

dissolved in 1993 under § 922 of the Nonprofit Corporation Act, but reinstated in 2009

under § 925, continued to exist as a de facto corporation during the period of dissolution

such that defendant Ruth Averill, a member and shareholder of the corporation , was

required to provide notice to the corporation pursuant to its Articles of Agreement of the

pending sale of her property; and (3) whether defendant Averill is estopped to deny the

existence of the corporation, see Estey Mfg Co v Runnels , 55 Mich 130 ( 1884); Flueling v

Goeringer, 240 Mich 372 (1927).
Merrill Schneider, OSB #77336 

merrillschneider@schneiderlaw.com 

Schneider Kerr & Robichaux 

PO Box 14490 

Portland, Oregon 97293 

Phone: 503-255-9092 

Fax: 503-255-9145 

Attorney for Plain tiff 

IN THE UNITED STA TES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

DEMARCUS ROGERS, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

NANCY BERRYHILL, 

Commissioner of Social Security, 

Defendant. 

3:15-CV-02122-PK 

ORDER FOR ATTORNEY 

FEES UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) 

The court finds and orders an attorney fee of $3,326.22 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). 

The attorney fee of 1,634.18 allowed pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act will be 

refunded to Plaintiff upon counsel's receipt of the allowed 406(b) fee awarded. 

au! Papak 

United States Magistrate Judge
EXHIBIT 99.2

     Written  Statement  of the Chief  Financial  Officer  Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350

     Solely for the purposes of complying  with 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350, I, the
undersigned  Chief Financial  Officer of Traffix,  Inc. (the "Company"),  hereby
certify,  based on my knowledge,  that the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the
Company for the quarter ended  September 18, 2002 (the "Report")  fully complies
with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934
and that information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

                                                     /s/ DANIEL HARVEY
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     DANIEL HARVEY
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
Laurie Shertz LLC, OSB 96477 

121 SW Salmon, 11th Floor 

Portland, OR 97204 

tel: 503/406-2136 

fax: 503/406-2136 

e: Laurie@LShertzlaw.com

Attorney for Darryl Thorn

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PORTLAND DIVISION 

I, Laurie Shertz, state under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States 

of America pursuant to 28 USC §1746 that the following is true and correct: 

1. Mr. Thorn was found to be indigent and I was appointed to assist him effective 

February 12, 2016 by the Honorable Judge John V. Acosta.

2. Mr. Thorn remains in custody and to the best of my knowledge, his financial 

situation has not improved. 

3. I believe the attorney-client relationship has deteriorated between Mr. Thorn and 

myself to the point that I can no longer effectively represent him. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

Darryl Thorn, 

 Defendant.

No. 3:16 CR 00051-22 BR 

MOTION TO WITHDRAW AND FOR 

SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL 

SECOND REQUEST

United States v. Thorn 

USDC Oregon 3:16 CR 00051-22 BR 

Page 1 - DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO WITHDRAW AND FOR 

 SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL

LAURIE SHERTZ LLC, OSB #96477 

121 SW SALMON STREET, 11TH FLOOR  PORTLAND, OR 97204 

503-406-2136   e: Laurie@LShertzlaw.com

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 706 Filed 06/15/16 Page 1 of 2
4. During a jail visit with Mr. Thorn on April 13, 2016, he informed me I was 

“Fired.” 

5. Communication between Mr. Thorn and I has broken down and is irreparable. 

6. I request the opportunity to address the court in camera on this issue in order to 

preserve Mr. Thorn’s confidences. 

7. I have consulted with the CJA Panel Office. They do not take a position on this 

motion but stand prepared to appoint new counsel if ordered to do so by the Court. 

Therefore, I request the Court immediately appoint new counsel to represent Mr. Thorn

pursuant to 18 USC §3006A. 

8. This case is presently scheduled for trial in September, 2016. 

 Respectfully submitted this 15 of June, 2016. 

 /s/ Laurie Shertz 

LAURIE SHERTZ, OSB # 96477 

 503/406-2136 

Attorney for Darryl Thorn

United States v. Thorn 

USDC Oregon 3:16 CR 00051-22 BR 

Page 2 - DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO WITHDRAW AND FOR 

 SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL

LAURIE SHERTZ LLC, OSB #96477 

121 SW SALMON STREET, 11TH FLOOR  PORTLAND, OR 97204 

503-406-2136   e: Laurie@LShertzlaw.com

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 706 Filed 06/15/16 Page 2 of 2
UN I TE D ST AT ES D I STR I CT C OU RT F O R T H E D IS T R IC T O F C O LU M B IA

____________________________________ ) ALVI N B . TRUESDAL E, ) ) Plaintiff, )

) v. ) Civil Action No. 08-1862 ( PL F) ) UNI TED STATES DEPARTMENT ) OF JUSTI CE e t al

. , ) ) De fe nd ants . ) ____________________________________)
ORDER For the re asons stated in the a ccompa nying O pinion, it i s here by ORDERED that plaintiff’s motions to strike [Dkt. #21, 22, 34, 36] , for a committee investig ation [Dkt. #27] , for f raud upon the court [Dkt. #28] , to disqualify counsel [Dk t. # 31 ], f or sanc tio ns [Dk

t. # 32 ], to c ontin

ue [Dk t. # 33 ], f or e ntr y of de fa ult [Dk t. # 35 ], to compel [Dkt. #37] , for a

pre- trial confe renc e by

audio-video c onnection [Dkt. #43] , and to amend the c omp la int

[Dk t. # 44 ] ar e DENI ED ; it

is F UR TH ER O RD ERE D that de fe nd ants ’ m oti on to d ism iss [Dk

t. # 10 ] is GRANTED I

N PART and DENI ED I

N PART WI THOUT PREJ UDI CE. All claims ex cept f or plaintiff’s F OIA and Privac y Act cla ims are dismissed, and a ll parties except the United States De pa rtme nt o f Jus tic e are dis mis se d; a nd it i s2 F UR TH ER O RD ERE D that on or be fo re Oc tob e r 3 0, 20 09 , th e pa rt ie s sh a ll propose a schedule in writing a s to how they wish to procee d in this case. SO ORDERED. / s / PAULL . FRI EDMAN DA T E : S ep t em b er

2 9 , 2 0 0 9 Un i t edS t at es Di s tri ctJ u d ge
Exhibit 4.51

                              Fourth Amendment to
                              Amended and Restated
                      Certificate of Limited Partnership of
                Geodyne Energy Income Limited Partnership II-E


     The undersigned,  desiring to amend its amended and restated  certificate
of limited  partnership  pursuant  to the  Oklahoma  Revised  Uniform  Limited
Partnership Act, as amended,  Okla.  Stat. tit. 54 (1993),  Section 301 et seq
(the "Act"), do hereby state:

1.  The  name of the  limited  partnership  is  Geodyne  Energy  Income  Limited
Partnership II-E.

2. The  dates of  filing  of the  Certificate  of  Limited  Partnership  and all
amendments thereto are as follows:

      Name                                                    Date
      Agreement and Certificate of Limited
            Partnership                                       9/28/88
      Amended and Restated Certificate of
            Limited Partnership                               3/10/89
      First Amendment to Amended and Restated
            Certificate of Limited Partnership                2/25/93
      Second Amendment to Amended and Restated
            Certificate of Limited Partnership                7/19/96
      Third Amendment to Amended and Restated
            Certificate of Limited Partnership                11/21/01

3.  The  Third  Amendment  to  Amended  and  Restated   Certificate  of  Limited
Partnership  dated November 14, 2001,  and filed with the Oklahoma  Secretary of
State on November 21,  2001,  stated that the latest date upon which the limited
partnership  is to dissolve is December  31,  2003.  Pursuant to its terms,  the
Agreement and Certificate of Limited  Partnership  dated September 27, 1988 (the
"Partnership  Agreement")  was amended on November 18,  2003,  to state that the
latest date upon which the  Partnership  is to dissolve  is December  31,  2005,
provided that the General  Partner may extend the term of the Partnership for up
to three additional  periods of two years each pursuant to the provisions of the
Partnership Agreement.

      Therefore,  the Amended and Restated Certificate of Limited Partnership is
hereby  revised  to state that the latest  date on which the  Partnership  is to
dissolve  is  December  31,  2005,  subject  to  extension  as set  forth in the
Partnership's Partnership Agreement.

      Dated:  November 21, 2003.

                                          GEODYNE RESOURCES, INC.
                                          General Partner


                                          By://s// Dennis R. Neill
                                          -------------------------
                                          Dennis R. Neill, President
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 21-0520

IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF:

SCOTT A. ST. CLAIR,

 Petitioner and Appellee,

 and

CLARICE J. ST. CLAIR,

 Respondent and Appellant.

ORDER OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

This appeal being subject to M.R.App.P. 7, and the parties having failed to jointly 

and timely select a mediator under M.R.App.P., 7(4),(c),

IT IS ORDERED THAT KD Feeback, whose name appears next on the list of

attorneys desiring appointment as mediators for Domestic Relations appeals which is 

maintained pursuant to M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby appointed to conduct the 

mediation process required by M.R.App.P., 7(5), and 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time periods set forth in M.R.App.P., 

7(5)(d) shall run from the date of this order of appointment.

A true copy of this order is being mailed to counsel of record for the parties, or to 

the parties individually if not represented by counsel, on the date hereof.

DATED this November 16, 2021.

Bowen Greenwood, Clerk of the Supreme Court

c: David B. Gallik, Michelle H. Vanisko

11/16/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0520
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-20913 Summary Calendar

IVO NABELEK, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus JANIE COCKRELL, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-01-CV-4181

-------------------- January 30, 2003 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Ivo Nabelek (“Nabelek”), Texas state prisoner #669748, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his writ of mandamus petition for lack of jurisdiction. Because his claims are not cognizable for habeas review, Nabelek’s request for a certificate of appealability (COA) is DENIED AS UNNECESSARY. Nabelek argues that under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, the district court has jurisdiction to order Texas prison officials to provide him with free copies of documents and a box for mailing thoseNo. 02-20913 -2- copies. Title 28, Section 1651(a) is not an independent grant of jurisdiction; it authorizes a court to issue commands necessary to effectuate orders it has previously issued “‘in its exercise of jurisdiction otherwise obtained .’” Texas v. Real Parties In

Interest , 259 F.3d 387, 392 (5th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted) (emphasis added), cert. denied , 534 U.S. 1115 (2002); Clinton v. Goldsmith , 526 U.S. 529, 534-35 (1999). Mandamus jurisdiction is conferred only when the defendant officer, employee, or agency owes a specific, non-discretionary duty to the plaintiff. Kirkland Masonry, Inc. v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue , 614 F.2d 532, 534 (5th Cir. 1980). Nabelek has not provided authority for his contention that he has a right to free copies or a box to aid him in refiling his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. Moreover, our mandamus authority does not extend to state officials, and therefore we cannot grant Nabelek any relief with respect to prison officials. Cf. Moye v. Clerk, DeKalb County Superior
Court , 474 F.2d 1275, 1276 (5th Cir. 1973) (federal courts lack authority to “issue writs of mandamus to direct state courts and their judicial officers in the performance of their duties”). The district court did not err in dismissing Nabelek’s mandamus petition because the court lacked authority to issue a writ of mandamus providing the relief requested. Nabelek’s appeal presents no issue of arguable merit and is, therefore, dismissed as frivolous. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
COA DENIED AS UNNECESSARY; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.
##### 



1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of DataWave Systems, Inc.;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.
  /s/    John Gunn


John Gunn, General Manager and Chief Financial Officer
 - 28 -
II

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1824

To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to provide

duty-free treatment for certain skating boots used for in-line skates.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 24, 1998

Mr. TORRICELLI (for himself and Mr. LAUTENBERG) introduced the following

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United

States to provide duty-free treatment for certain skating

boots used for in-line skates.

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

3 SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF DUTY-FREE TREATMENT

4 FOR SKATING BOOTS WITH TEXTILE UPPERS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 64 of the Harmonized

6 Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by insert7 ing in numerical sequence the following new subheadings

8 with the article description for such subheadings having
2

•S 1824 IS

1 the same degree of indentation as the article description

2 in subheading 6404.11.80:

‘‘ Valued over $12/pair:

6404.11.91 Skating boots for use in the

manufacture of in-line roller

skates ....................................... Free 35%

6404.11.93 Other ........................................ 20% Free

(CA,IL,MX)

35%

’’.

3 (b) STAGED RATE REDUCTION.—Any staged reduc4 tion of a rate of duty set forth in subheading 6404.11.90

5 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

6 that was proclaimed by the President before the date of

7 enactment of this Act and that would otherwise take effect

8 after such date of enactment shall apply to the correspond9 ing duty rate set forth in subheading 6404.11.93 of the

10 Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, as

11 added by subsection (a).

12 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

13 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn

14 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day

15 after the date of enactment of this Act.

Æ