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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM INTERIM
CONDENSED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10Q - COMMUNICATIONS & POWER INDUSTRIES
HOLDING CORPORATION FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JULY 4, 1997.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001000654
<NAME> COMMUNICATIONS & POWER INDUSTRIES HOLDING COPR.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-03-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-04-1997
<CASH>                                           2,234
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   47,657
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     52,471
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               110,624
<PP&E>                                          81,560
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 230,561
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           74,233
<BONDS>                                        131,700
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           16,847
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                     (4,242)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   230,561
<SALES>                                        185,389
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               185,389
<CGS>                                          135,316
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  135,316
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,665
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,245
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,979
<INCOME-TAX>                                       658
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,321
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,321
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.1


CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report of ARC Wireless Solutions,
Inc. on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jason
Young, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, to my knowledge that:





(1) 
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





(2) 
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.





Date: May
10, 2010




By:
                /s/
      Jason YoungName:   
      Jason YoungTitle:     
      Principal Executive
Officer
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 16**  **- 2141** 

In re: ANTHONY COOK; DAVID DUREN; YAHYA MUQUIT; LAWRENCE CRAWFORD , Petitioners.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. ( 4:16

- cv - 02939

- MBS

- TER )

Submitted: February 16, 2017 Dec ided: February 21, 2017

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, DUNCAN , Circuit Judge , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion
. Anthony Cook, David Duren, Yahya Muquit, Lawrence Crawford, Pe titioners Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Petitioners seek several forms of mandamus relief, including writ s of mandamus against multiple federal judges
. Petitioners also se ek to proceed in forma pauperis and have filed motions for a ruling of law, for recusal, and for this court to reconsider its previous orders in this and related appeals
. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U . S
. Di st. Court , 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976) ; United States v. Moussaoui , 333 F.3d 509, 516

- 17 (4th Cir. 2003) . Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass ’ n , 860 F.2d 135 , 138 (4th Cir. 1988)
. We have reviewed Petitioners’ filings and conclude that Petitioners have not established that extraordinary circumstances exist warranting mandamus relief. To the extent Petitioners challenge the district court’s rulings in their

re spective district court actions, or this court’s prior orders, mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp. , 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). And to the extent Petitioners ask that district court judges or judges of this court be ordered to recuse themselves from participation in their respective actions or appeals ,3 Petitioners have not established extra

- judicial bias. See In re Beard , 811 F.2d 818, 826

- 27 (4th Cir. 1987). According ly, although we grant Petitioners’ applications to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny mandamus relief and Petitioners’ other pending motions . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
. 

Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program 

Technical Work Group Meeting 

August 15, 2002 

Presiding: Kurt Dongoske, Chairman 

Committee Members Present:

Perri Benemelis, ADWR 

Kerry Christensen, Hualapai Tribe 

Wayne Cook, UCRC 

Jonathan Damp, Pueblo of Zuni 

William Davis, CREDA 

Brenda Drye, So. Paiute Consortium 

Lloyd Greiner, UAMPS 

Christopher Harris, CRBC 

Norm Henderson, GLCA 

Amy Heuslein, BIA 

Pamela Hyde, Southwest Rivers 

Matt Kaplinski, GCRG 

Phillip S. Lehr, Colo. River Comm./NV 

Don Metz, USFWS 

S. Clayton Palmer, WAPA 

Bill Persons, AGFD 

Randall Peterson, USBR 

Nikolai Ramsey, Grand Canyon Trust 

D. Randolph Seaholm, CWCB 

John W. Shields, WY State Engineer’s Office 

Robert Winfree, NPS/GRCA 

Michael Yeatts, The Hopi Tribe 

Committee Members Absent:

Robert Begay, Navajo Nation 

Dave Cohen, Trout Unlimited 

Nancy Hornewer, USGS 

Robert King, UDWR 

John Whipple, NM State Engineer’s Office

 

Alternates Present: For:

Wayne Cook John Whipple, NM State Engineer’s Office 

Interested Parties:

Barbara Alberti, NPS 

Mary Barger, WAPA 

Gary Burton, WAPA 

Denny Fenn, GCRMC/USGS 

Steve Gloss, GCMRC/USGS 

Dennis Kubly, USBR 

Ruth Lambert, GCRMC/USGS 

Lisa Leap, NPS 

Robert S. Lynch, Attorney 

Steve Mietz, GCMRC/USGS 

Tony Morton, USBR 

Tom Ryan, USBR 

Dan Shein, AZ House of Reps 

Recorder: Linda Whetton, USBR
 

Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program 

Technical Work Group Meeting 

August 16, 2002 

Presiding: Kurt Dongoske, Chairman 

Committee Members Present:

Perri Benemelis, ADWR 

Kerry Christensen, Hualapai Tribe 

Wayne Cook, UCRC 

Jonathan Damp, Pueblo of Zuni 

William Davis, CREDA 

Brenda Drye, So. Paiute Consortium 

Lloyd Greiner, UAMPS 

Christopher Harris, CRBC 

Norm Henderson, GLCA 

Pamela Hyde, Southwest Rivers 

Matt Kaplinski, GCRG 

Phillip S. Lehr, Colo. River Comm./NV 

Don Metz, USFWS 

S. Clayton Palmer, WAPA 

Bill Persons, AGFD 

Randall Peterson, USBR 

Nikolai Ramsey, Grand Canyon Trust 

D. Randolph Seaholm, CWCB 

John W. Shields, WY State Engineer’s Office 

Robert Winfree, NPS/GRCA 

Michael Yeatts, The Hopi Tribe 

Committee Members Absent:

Robert Begay, Navajo Nation 

Dave Cohen, Trout Unlimited 

Nancy Hornewer, USGS 

Robert King, UDWR 

John Whipple, NM State Engineer’s Office

 

Alternates Present: For:

Wayne Cook John Whipple, NM State Engineer’s Office 

Interested Parties:

Mary Barger, WAPA 

Gary Burton, WAPA 

Denny Fenn, GCRMC/USGS 

Steve Gloss, GCMRC/USGS 

Dennis Kubly, USBR 

Lisa Leap, NPS 

Robert S. Lynch, Attorney 

Steve Mietz, GCMRC/USGS 

Tony Morton, USBR 

Mary Orton, The Mary Orton Company 

Recorder: Linda Whetton, USBR
#### In the Matter of Darlene A. Baird, Petitioner, v New York State and Local Retirement System, Respondent.

[947 NYS2d 645]

Mercure, J.P.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Comptroller which denied petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits.

Petitioner was employed as a senior information system clerk with the Westchester County Department of Social Services. She was injured in 2004 while performing a physical test during an interview for another position with the Department. Petitioner thereafter attempted to return to work, but left after three days due to pain in her right shoulder and arm. Petitioner’s subsequent application for accidental disability retirement benefits was denied on the basis that she was not permanently incapacitated from the performance of her job duties. The Comptroller ultimately upheld the denial of petitioner’s application on that ground, prompting this proceeding.

The Comptroller’s determination relies primarily upon the *1266report of Charles Ricciardelli, the physician who examined petitioner on behalf of respondent. Based upon his examination of petitioner and review of her medical records in 2006, Ricciardelli concluded that petitioner had pain in her right upper arm caused by the accident, but was exaggerating the pain, and had only a mild, partial disability. However, the record includes the report of an MRI of petitioner’s right shoulder taken after Ricciardelli examined her, which indicates that petitioner has a biceps tendon tear. Respondent does not indicate that Ricciardelli was given the chance to review the right shoulder MRI report; nor did respondent call him to testify and, thus, there is no basis for concluding that his opinion would have remained unchanged in light of the new information contained therein.

While the Comptroller is vested with authority to evaluate conflicting medical opinions and credit the opinion of one expert over that of another, the medical proof relied upon must articulate a rational, fact-based opinion based upon a physical examination and review of all the relevant medical records *(see Matter of Danieu v DiNapoli,*77 AD3d 1152, 1154 [2010]; *Matter of Schine v Hevesi,*40 AD3d 1362, 1363 [2007]). Inasmuch as Ricciardelli was not given the opportunity to clarify his opinion based upon a review of all the relevant medical records, the determination is not supported by substantial evidence and must be annulled and remitted for further proceedings *(see Matter of Danieu v DiNapoli,*77 AD3d at 1154-1155; *Matter of King v DiNapoli,*75 AD3d 793, 796 [2010]).

Kavanagh, Stein, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is annulled, without costs, petition granted and matter remitted to the Comptroller for further proceedings not inconsistent with this Court’s decision.
# L_2009061EN.01001101.xml

| 5.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 61/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 61/11

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 173/2009

of 4 March 2009

fixing the import duties applicable to semi-milled and wholly milled rice from 5 March 2009

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1), and in particular Article 139 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Based on the information provided by the competent authorities, the Commission notes that import licences for semi-milled and wholly milled rice falling within CN code 1006 30 have been issued in respect of 160 203 tonnes for the period from 1 September 2008 to 28 February 2009. The import duty for semi-milled and wholly milled rice falling within CN code 1006 30 must therefore be adjusted. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Based on the information provided by the competent authorities, the Commission notes that import licences for semi-milled and wholly milled rice falling within CN code 1006 30 have been issued in respect of 160 203 tonnes for the period from 1 September 2008 to 28 February 2009. The import duty for semi-milled and wholly milled rice falling within CN code 1006 30 must therefore be adjusted.

| (2) | As the applicable duty must be fixed within 10 days of the end of the period mentioned above, this Regulation should come into force immediately, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As the applicable duty must be fixed within 10 days of the end of the period mentioned above, this Regulation should come into force immediately,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The import duty for semi-milled and wholly milled rice falling within CN code 1006 30 shall be EUR 145 per tonne.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 4 March 2009.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

---
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute

controlli ng legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

NO. COA13

- 739 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 21 January 2014

JONATHAN HENSLEE, Plaintiff

v. Industrial Commission No. TA
- 22724 NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Defendant
Appeal by plaintiff from decision and order entered 20 March 2013 by the North Carolina Industrial Commission
. Heard in the Court of Appeals 30 December 2013
.
Plaintiff

- appellant Jonathan Henslee, pro se. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Associate Attorney General Adrian W. Dellinger, for defendant

- appellee North Carolina Department of Public Safety
.

HUNTER , JR . , Robert N., Judge.
Plaintiff Jonathan Henslee appeals from a decision and order of the North Carolina Industrial C ommission (“the Commiss ion”) denying his claim pursuant to the Tort Claims Act. We dismiss the appeal.- 2

-

Plaintiff ha d a statutory right to appeal to this Court from the Commission’s final decision and order. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A

- 29(a) (2013 ). However, “‘ [w]ithout proper notice of appeal, the appellate court acquires no jurisdiction and neither the court nor the parties may waive the jurisdictional requirements even for good cause shown under Rule 2 [of the Rules of Appellate Procedure]. ’” Finley Forest C ondo. Ass’ n v. Perry , 163 N.C. App. 735, 741, 594 S.E.2d 227, 231 (2004) ( internal quotation marks and citation omitted )
. Therefore, a n appellant’s failure to file a written notice of appeal and include the notice in the record on appeal are sufficient
gr ounds to dismiss the appeal. In re Me.B. , 181 N.C. App. 597, 600, 640 S.E.2d 407, 409 (2007)
. Here, plaintiff’s record on appeal does not contain a written notice of appeal to this Court from the Commission’s final order and decision , and plaintiff has failed to satisfy the jurisdictional requirement of demonstrating he filed written notice of appeal
. Although plaintiff is acting pro se , he must still comply with the Rules of Appellate Procedure. Bledsoe v. County of Wilkes , 135 N.C. App. 124, 125, 519 S.E.2d 316, 317 (1999). Therefore, i n the absence of a notice of appeal in the record on appeal , plaintiff’s appeal is subject to dismissal.- 3

-

Finally, we note that plaintiff has not petition ed this Court for a writ of certiora ri requesting review of the Commission’s order , and “[i] t is not the role of the appellate
courts . . . to create an appeal for an appellant. ” Viar v.
N.C. DOT , 359 N.C. 400, 402, 610 S.E.2d 360, 361, reh’ g denied , 359 N.C. 643, 617 S.E.2d 662 (2005). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. Dismissed. Chief Judge MARTIN and Judge DILLON concur. Report per Rule 30(e).
EXHIBIT
4.1


DESCRIPTION
OF THE REGISTRANT’S SECURITIES


REGISTERED
PURUSANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE SECURITIES


EXCHNAGE
ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED


 


As
of December 31, 2019, Fortune Valley Treasures, Inc. (“we,” “our,” “us” or the “Company”)
had one class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange
Act”): its common stock with a par value of $0.001 per share (“Common Stock”).


 


Pursuant
to our articles of incorporation, as amended, our authorized capital stock is 3,000,000,000
shares of Common Stock. The following description summarizes the material terms of our capital stock. For a complete description
of the matters set forth herein, you should refer to our articles of incorporation and bylaws, as amended and the applicable provisions
of Nevada law.


 


Defined
terms used herein and not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Company’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K.


 


Common
Stock


 


The
holders of the Common Stock shall possess all voting power and each share of Common Stock shall have one vote on all matters submitted
to the stockholders for a vote.


 


Capital
Market


 


Our
Common Stock is quoted on the OTCQB marketplace of the OTC Markets Group, Inc. under the symbol “FVTI.”
Risk Assessment: Nonnative f

escapement through 

Glen Canyon Dam

David Ward

Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research 

Southwest Biological Science Cente
What is the risk of nonnative fish pass

Francis Style Turbines
What data do we have ?

• Data from Davis Dam

7 repatriated Razorback sucke

Lake Mohave to Lake H

via Davis Dam

• Capture Data from Below Glen Ca

Dam 
3.0 

Walleye 

Frequency 

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 

Smallmouth Bas

Frequency 

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 

0 100 200 300 

0 100 200 300 400 500

Total Length Total Length 

3.0 

1.0 0.5 0.0 

0 100 200 300

Total Length 

400 500

1.0 0.5 0.0 

Striped Bass 

All in last 3 years 

0 100 200 300 

Total Length 

Channel Catfish 

2.5 2.0 

2.5 2.0 

Frequency 

Frequency 1.5 1.5
Number of Green Sunfish 

40 302010

0 

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Year 
What keeps fish from mov

through GC Dam? 

• Depth of penstocks 
What keeps fish from mov

through GC Dam? 

• Depth of penstocks • Water temperature/quality at those d

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

Lake mixing during the spring and fa
• Its not currently habitat for those lake 

What keeps fish from 

establishing downstream

species 
What is habitat?

• Wildlife Management/Ecology definiti

An environment that contains all of th

resources that an animal needs to coits life cycle (survive, grow to maturity and reproduce) 

Question then becomes what is lim
Lechleitner 1992, Literature Review of the thermal requirement and tolerances of organisms below Gle
Lechleitner 1992, Literature Review of the thermal requirement and tolerances of organisms below Gle

Val
Adapted from Voichick and Wright 2007 

Pre Dam 

Filling 

Lake is full 

What we know 

• Continuous cold water is detrimental 

native fish!

• Continuous cold water is also detrim

to warm water invasive fish 
Temperature Conundrum fo

Colorado River Native Fishe

Cold Water is Bad Warm Water is 

(physiological effects) VS (Invasive fish ef

We currently appear to be in a “Sweet S

Will it la
But what about climate change and drought induced w

• Climate forecasts indicate: Continued dr

the southwest
1

Wright, S. A., C. R. Anderson, and N. Voichick (2008),

below

A simplified

Glen Canyon

water temperature

Dam, River Research

model for

and

the

Applications

Colorado River

, 25(6), 675‐686. Time 
My Ranking of Threat
Conclusions

Fish in Lake Powell will pass

Through Dam

Low reservoir water level increases risk

Cold water is likely preventing establishme
Conclusions

• Interval of drought induced warm

may play a critical role in whether not new species of warm water nonative fish establish in Grand Can

• Cold water most of the time - altho

detrimental to Grand Canyon natifishes, may be the best way to conserve them 
Conclusions 

• Annual invasive species monitori

and mechanical removal below thmay be warranted

• Removing areas that are habitat f

warm water invasive fishes seema good idea
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

					NO. 2-02-378-CR

ERNEST M. ITOKA               						APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

	----------

	FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 9 OF TARRANT COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	We have considered the appellant’s “Motion To Dismiss Appeal.”  The motion complies with rule 42.2(a) of the rules of appellate procedure. Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  No decision of this court having been delivered before we received this motion, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See id.; Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f). 

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:	HOLMAN, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: June 19, 2003
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT SHARON LYNN FLEMING, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-2975 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ________________________________ ) Opinion filed April 20, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lee County; Bruce E. Kyle, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Megan Olson, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. NORTHCUTT, CRENSHAW, and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.
#### In the Matter of Christine G. Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent; Herbie G., Appellant. In the Matter of Michelle G. Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent; Herbie G., Appellant.

Submitted April 9, 2007;

decided June 5, 2007

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed as untimely *(see*CPLR 5513 [b]). Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

District of Oregon 

Case Number: 3:15-CV-1248-BR 

Plaintiff: 

Eileen Fox-Quamme, et al., 

VS. 

Defendant: 

Health Net Health Plan of Oregon, Inc., et al., 

Received by RUSH PROCESS SERVICE, INC. to be served on Health Net Health Plan of Oregon, Inc. c/o 

CT Corporation System, Registered Agent, 388 State St., Suite 420, Salem, OR 97301. 

I, Veronica T. Broeth, being duly sworn, depose and say that on the 14th day of July, 2015 at 1:11 pm, I: 

Served the within named corporation by delivering a true copy of a Summons; Complaint; Civil Case 

Assignment Order; Discovery and Pretrial Scheduling Order; Discovery Agreement; Consent to 

Jurisdiction by a Magistrate Judge; Civil Case Management Time Schedules, by personal service upon 

Rylynn Poole, Service of Process Technician who is authorized to accept service on behalf of the registered 

agent 

I am a competent person 18 years of age or older and a resident of the state of service or this state and am not 

a party to nor an officer, director or employee of, nor attorney for any party, corporate or otherwise; and the 

person, firm, or corporation served is the identical one named in the action. 

Sworn to before m on the 15th day Veronica T. Broeth · 

Process Server 

RUSH PROCESS SERVICE, INC. 

2014 N.E. Sandy Blvd., Suite 204 

Portland, OR 97232 

(503) 232-3667 

Our Job Serial Number: SKS-2015008402 

Ref: 11025-01 

Copyright© 1992.2011 Database Services, Inc. - Process Server's Toolbox V6.4t 

Case 3:15-cv-01248-BR Document 9 Filed 07/28/15 Page 1 of 1