alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

MICHAEL SMITH, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

COMMISSIONER SOCIAL SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION, 

Defendant. 

MARSH, Judge 

Case No. 3:16-cv-00703-MA 

ORDER FOR EAJA FEES 

On October 21, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Unopposed Application for Fees Pursuant to the 

Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), in which the pmiies agree that Plaintiff 

should be awarded fees in the amount of $5,896.01. ECF No. 27. 

Accordingly, based on the agreement of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that attorney fees 

in the amount of$5,896.0l shall be awarded to Plaintiff pursuant to EAJA. There are no costs or 

expenses. The parties agree that attorney fees will be paid to Plaintiffs attorney subject to 

verification that Plaintiff does not have a debt which qualifies for offset against the awarded fees, 

pursuant to the Treasury Offset Program as discussed in Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010). 

1 - ORDER FOR EAJA FEES 
If Plaintiff has no such debt, then the check shall be made out to Plaintiffs attorney, Bruce 

W. Brewer, at his address: P.O. Box 421, West Linn, Oregon 97068. If Plaintiff has a debt, then 

the check for any remaining funds after offset of the debt shall be made out to Plaintiff and mailed 

to Plaintiffs attorney's office at the address stated above. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATEDthis_j_Q_ day of OCTOBER, 2017. 

7n4.f .. ...J- #'- .??l~ Malcolm F. Marsh 

United States District Judge 

2 - ORDER FOR EAJA FEES
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 21



                                 SRS LABS, INC.
                                  SUBSIDIARIES



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                 Jurisdiction of
             Name                Incorporation                         Ownership
             ----                ---------------                       ---------
<S>                              <C>                           <C>
SRSWOWcast.com, Inc.             Delaware                      SRS Labs, Inc. - 100% Direct

ValenceTech Limited              Bermuda                       SRS Labs, Inc. - 100%
                                                               Direct

Valence Technology, Inc.         British Virgin Islands        SRS Labs, Inc. - 100%
("Valence BVI")                                                Direct


Valence Technology, Inc.         Hong Kong                     Valence BVI - 100% Direct
("Valence-H.K.")

Valence Semiconductor            Hong Kong                     Valence H.K. - 100% Direct
Design Limited

ASP Microelectronics Limited     Hong Kong                     Valence H.K. - 100% Direct
("ASP")

LEC Electronic Components        Hong Kong                     Valence H.K. - 100% Direct
Limited ("LEC")

VSD Electronics Limited          Hong Kong                     Valence H.K. - 100% Direct

LEC Microelectronics Limited     Hong Kong                     ASP - 100% Direct


LEC Electronics Limited          Hong Kong                     LEC - 100% Direct

VSD Electronics (Hui Yang) Ltd.  Peoples Republic of China     LEC - 100% Direct
</TABLE>
Overview of Reclamation 

FY 13-14 Budget 

Glen Knowles

Bureau of Reclamation

Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program 

Technical Work Group 

April 3, 2013
Reclamation FY 2013-14 Budget

Proposed Changes

Sequestration – May result in a 5% cut to the FY2013 

Budget = $522,030.

April 3 TWG Webinar – Cost savings to TWG Budget, 

may be reallocated to fund cuts or other programs.

Cultural Program – Our initial budget projections need 

to be updated, some funding will be redirected to 

fund tribes to work on LTEMP.
Reclamation FY 2013-14 Budget

Adaptive Management Work Group

Description

FY12 

w/3.9% 

FY13 

w/3.0% 

FY14 

w/3.0% 

AMWG

Personnel Costs - Labor & Burden 184,846 190,391 196,103

AMWG Member Travel Reimb 14,756 15,199 15,655

AMWG Reclamation Travel Reimb. 15,140 15,595 16,062

Facilitation Contract 40,531 41,747 43,000

POAHG Expenses - Labor/Burden/Travel 59,305 61,084 62,917

Other 8,509 8,765 9,028

Subtotal $323,087 $332,781 $342,765
Reclamation FY 2013-14 Budget

Technical Work Group

TWG FY 12 FY 13 FY 14

Personnel Costs - Labor 92,045 94,806 97,651

TWG Member Travel Reimb. 21,681 22,331 23,001

Reclamation Travel 14,958 15,407 15,869

TWG Chair / Facilitation 30,145 31,049 31,980

Other 2,431 2,504 2,579

Subtotal $161,260 $166,097 $171,080
Reclamation FY 2013-14 Budget

Other Costs

OTHER FY 12 FY 13 FY 14

Admin Support NPS Permitting 121,882 126,242 130,029

Contract Administration Labor/Burden/Travel 42,665 43,945 45,264

Experimental Funds 507,679 515,000 515,000

Integrated Tribal Resource Monitoring 152,583 157,160 161,875

Native Fish Conservation Carryover Fund $ 0 $782,660 $1,321,139

Subtotal $1,084,559 $1,625,007 $2,173,308
Reclamation FY 2013-14 Budget

Cultural Program

FY 12 FY 13 FY 14

Reclamation Administration and Travel 64,226 127,839 131,310

Cultural Program Implementation 519,500 440,620 406,419

Subtotal $583,726 $568,459 $537,729

Reclamation Power Revenue Total $2,152,632 $2,692,344 $3,224,882

Reclamation Power Revenue w/o CO $2,152,632 $1,909,684 $1,903,742

CULTURAL PROGRAM

FY13 $66,000 $100,000 $10,000 $161,129 $15,000 $10,000 $362,129 

FY14 $50,000 $30,000 $10,000 $156,129 $50,000 $40,000 $336,129 

NNMOA Total

Consult

Implement 

LTEMP

Fiscal Year Treatment Associative 

Values

GCMRC 

Support

Tribal TEK 

Project

Cultural Program Implementation

Activity 2013 2014

Subtotal (less GCMRC 

Sup.) 207,030 185,400

DOI Overhead (35%) 72,461 64,890

GCMRC Support 161,129 156,129

Project total 440,620 406,419
Reclamation FY 2013-14 Budget

Tribal Participation

FY 2013 FY 2014

Hopi Tribe 95,000 95,000

Hualapai Tribe 95,000 95,000

Navajo Nation 95,000 95,000

Pueblo of Zuni 95,000 95,000

Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians 95,000 95,000

OI Agency Appropriated Funds Total $475,000 $475,000

TRIBAL CONTRACTS
* 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.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________

No. 97-60486

____________

LUCIAN MARINESCU,

Petitioner,

versus

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,

Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order

of the Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A 71 980 313

June 24, 1998

Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Lucian Calin Marinescu petitions for review of the Board of

Immigration Appeals’ decision dismissing his appeal from the

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and

for a withholding of deportation. We have reviewed the record and

the briefs and determine that the Board’s decision is supported by

substantial evidence. See Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78 F.3d 194,

197 (5th Cir. 1996). The petition for review is DENIED.
Fifth Amendment to the
                        Implementation Partner Agreement
                                     between
                     Intelligroup, Inc. and PeopleSoft, Inc.


THIS Fifth Amendment to the Implementation Partner Agreement  ("Amendment") is
made and entered into on 15 July,  1998  ("Amendment  Effective  Date") by and
between PeopleSoft, Inc. ("PeopleSoft") and Intelligroup, Inc. ("Licensee").

The parties hereby agree that the  Implementation  Partner Agreement between the
parties, dated July 15, 1997 ("Agreement") is amended to provide as follows:

1.   Definitions.  Unless otherwise  defined herein,  capitalized  terms used in
this shall have the same meaning as those used in the Agreement.

2.   Term.  The term of the  Agreement is hereby  extended for one year and will
expire on 15 July, 1999, subject to the original terms of the Agreement.

3.   Membership Fees. The Annual Alliance Program Membership/Partner Fee
for the extended term is $20,000.

4.   Conflict.  In the event of any  conflicts  or  inconsistencies  between the
provisions of this  Amendment and the  Agreement  and/or any  amendments/addenda
thereto,  the provisions of this Amendment  shall prevail.  The remainder of the
Agreement shall remain in full force and effect, unamended.



ACCEPTED BY:                              ACCEPTED BY:
INTELLIGROUP, INC.                        PEOPLESOFT, INC.


/s/ Samar Mismra                          /s/ Jeff McClure
------------------------------------      ----------------------------------
Authorized Signature                      Authorized Signature


Samar Mismra, Associate Partner           Jeff McClure, Dir. Service Alliances
------------------------------------      ----------------------------------
Printed Name and Title                    Printed Name and Title
NUMBER 13-13-00649-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

MARKUS A. GREEN, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 24th District Court 

of Calhoun County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Markus A. Green, proceeding pro se, attempted to perfect an appeal 

from the trial court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction habeas corpus relief. We 

dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

The trial court’s order denying relief was rendered on or about September 4, 2013. 

The notice of appeal was not filed until November 14, 2013. No motion for new trial was 
2

filed. On November 25, 2013, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared 

that the appeal was not timely perfected. Appellant was advised that the appeal would 

be dismissed if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the 

Court’s directive. On December 9, 2013, appellant filed an amended notice of appeal 

pertaining to the same trial court order and contending that appellant did not timely 

receive a copy of the trial court’s order. 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.2 provides that an appeal is perfected when 

notice of appeal is filed within thirty days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended 

in open court unless a motion for new trial is timely filed. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). The 

time within which to file the notice may be enlarged if, within fifteen days after the deadline 

for filing the notice, the party files the notice of appeal and a motion complying with Rule 

10.5(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. 26.3. 

This Court's appellate jurisdiction in a criminal case is invoked by a timely filed 

notice of appeal. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). AWhen a 

notice of appeal is filed within the fifteen-day period but no timely motion for extension of 

time is filed, the appellate court lacks jurisdiction.@ Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 522. Absent a 

timely filed notice of appeal, a court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to address the 

merits of the appeal in a criminal case and can take no action other than to dismiss the 

appeal for want of jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1998). 

Appellant may be entitled to an out-of-time appeal by filing a post-conviction writ of 

habeas corpus returnable to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals; however, the 

availability of that remedy is beyond the jurisdiction of this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM.
3

PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, § 3(a) (West 2005); see also Ex parte Garcia, 988 S.W.2d 240 

(Tex. Crim. App. 1999).

The appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. 

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the 30th

day of January, 2014.
#### PEOPLE v. NOONEY.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.

December 2, 1895.)

Action by the people against, William Nooney,

John W. Lyon, for appellant.

M. H. Hirschberg, for respondent.

DYKMAN, J.

This is an appeal from an order made at the special term reducing the costs of the appellant in a former appeal from an order of the county court to the general term from a full bill of costs as on appeal from the judgment, and $10 costs of an appeal from an order. There is no doubt about the legality and propriety of the order, and it should be affirmed without an opinion.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S.D.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         844,253
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,367,562
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,728,006
<PP&E>                                      15,932,618
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,762,393
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,512,758
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,086,810
<BONDS>                                      3,713,251
<COMMON>                                     7,594,773
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,865,933
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,512,758
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,623,773
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,330,862
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,082,490
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             104,112
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                120,261
<INCOME-TAX>                                    61,900
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             58,361
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    58,361
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF ICG COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND JUNE 30, 1997 AND FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,
1996 AND 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERNCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0001001131
<NAME> ICG HOLDINGS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         382,220
<SECURITIES>                                    12,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                   53,739
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,086
<INVENTORY>                                      3,815
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               455,515
<PP&E>                                         593,553
<DEPRECIATION>                                  78,155
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,060,727
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           92,796
<BONDS>                                        904,614
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    271,652
<COMMON>                                           555
<OTHER-SE>                                   (209,194)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,060,727
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               127,816
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  119,265
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,788
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              53,481
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (144,351)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (144,351)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (144,351)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (4.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT





As adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 of Integrated BioPharma, Inc. (the “Company”) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Dina L. Masi, the Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Integrated BioPharma, Inc.(the "Company"), certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to her knowledge:





(1)
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and





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





This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed original of this written statement 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.






Date:  October 13, 2011
By: /s/ Dina L. MasiDina L. MasiSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### Lora Kojovic, Appellant, v Neal Goldman, Respondent.

Submitted January 8, 2007;

decided February 15, 2007

Motion by the Women’s Bar Association of the State of New York for leave to file a brief amicus curiae on the motion for leave to appeal herein granted and the brief is accepted as filed.

Judge Jones taking no part.
Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program

Technical Work Group Meeting, January 21, 2021

ACTION ITEMS, MOTIONS, and VOTES

MOTIONS AND VOTES

No motions or votes recorded. There were no objections to adopting the June 23-24, 

2020 and October 14-15, 2020 meeting minutes as final. 

ACTION ITEMS

1. Outstanding Items from October 14-15, 2020: 

• Larry Stevens / Administrative History Ad Hoc Group will convene prior to the 

annual reporting meeting to consider featuring Administrative History interviews 

at future AR and TWG meetings. There was also a suggestion to include monthly 

highlights on the Wiki page. 

• Consistent with the budget recommendation, the TWG commits to reviewing

JCM-West, Project O.11, and Year 2 of Project Elements O.1 and O.2 as part of

the annual TWP review process. 

• Brian Healy, NPS, will provide follow-up on a prior tracking question about the 

green sunfish; what fish prey on green sunfish and how green sunfish were 

introduced to the Grand Canyon system.

2. Larry Stevens / Species of Management Concern Ad Hoc Group will convene a meeting 

within one week of the TWG meeting. 

3. Seth Shanahan, SWNA and TWG Chair, requests all members review (for their own 

participation in) the Ad Hoc Group List and respond to Seth and Tara with any edits. 

4. Craig Ellsworth, WAPA and BAHG, will chair a panel about implications of a potential

7.48 million acre-feet release in WY2022; all TWG members requested to provide 

suggestions to Craig on research and monitoring that should be considered 

5. Scott VanderKooi, GCMRC will respond to Nevada and CREDA comments on the FY2020 

annual report on expenditures in writing and will share the response letters with the 

rest of the group. 

6. Ted Kennedy, GCMRC will review data from light traps and sticky traps obtained during 

the 2013 overflight to determine whether additional monitoring is warranted for the 

2021 overflight. 
7. Seth Shanahan / TWG Members will track basin-wide communication efforts and 

identify common areas of interest across programs. 

8. Topics of interest for future discussion:

• Information - Poster session follow-up presentation re: common carp impacts on 

eating eggs of native fish (GCMRC / David Ward) 

• Action - A new TWG Co-Vice Chair is needed due to departure of Vineetha

Kartha, ADWR. If you’re interested, please let Seth and Lee know. (All) 

• Update - status of the Tier 1 humpback chub trigger and the response actions 

being considered (Reclamation, USFWS)

• Update - Drought Operations planning responses (Reclamation) 

• Update - Reclamation-funded temperature control devices report (Reclamation) 

• Update - Colorado pikeminnow study (USFWS) 

• Update - 7.D Review of the 2007 Interim Guidelines (Reclamation)
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 99.2

                            STATEMENT UNDER OATH FOR
                           PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

I, Davinder Sethi, certify that:

         The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 2003
of Entrada Networks, Inc. fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained
in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 2003 of
Entrada Networks, Inc fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Entrada Networks, Inc.


                                                  Subscribed and sworn to
                                                  before me this 23rd day of May


  /s/ Davinder Sethi                              /s/ Gayle Bryant
------------------------                          --------------------------
Name: Davinder Sethi                              Notary Public
Principal Financial Officer
Date: May 23, 2003                                Seal