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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                        919603
<NAME>                       DIVA ENTERTAINMENT, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                  JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                        0
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 1,359,610
<ALLOWANCES>                                  157,750
<INVENTORY>                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              1,353,459
<PP&E>                                        349,316
<DEPRECIATION>                                159,673
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                2,304,422
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         2,371,012
<BONDS>                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   4,150,000
<COMMON>                                      5,498
<OTHER-SE>                                    (4,414,536)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  2,304,422
<SALES>                                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              1,856,633
<CGS>                                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 2,497,218
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              188,331
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            1,020
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (829,936)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           0
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (829,936)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (.15)



</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-08-150-CV

DAVID IRVIN, AS INDEPENDENT ADMINISTRATOR 			APPELLANT

OF ESTATE OF W. RAY IRVIN, JR.

	V.

LORETTA PARKER, AS ADMINISTRATOR 				   APPELLEE

WITH WILL ANNEXED OF ESTATE 

OF NOMA BISHOP IRVIN	

	----------

	FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO.1 OF WICHITA COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	We have considered the “Agreed Motion To Dismiss Appeal And Joint Motion For Nonsuit/Dismissal Of Under-Lying Suit.”  Because all of appellant’s claims were fully and finally adjudicated by the trial court’s order granting summary judgment, that judgment cannot be vitiated by way of a non-suit.  Hyundai Motor Co. v. Alvarado, 892 S.W.2d 853, 855 (Tex. 1995).  Accordingly, we deny the parties’ request for a non-suit.

	Nonetheless, the parties have jointly requested that this court dismiss this appeal with prejudice.  It is therefore the court’s opinion that the motion should be granted.  This appeal is dismissed with prejudice.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2), Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

	Costs of the appeal shall be paid by the party incurring the same, for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL:  CAYCE, C.J.; HOLMAN and GARDNER, JJ.

DELIVERED:  September 18, 2008
Exhibit 31.7**CERTIFICATIONS**I, Ronald L. Rossetti, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Tier Technologies, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     b) [not applicable];     c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: October 19, 2006 By:  /s/ Ronald L. Rossetti    **Ronald L. Rossetti**
**Exhibit32.1**

**CertificationPursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63of Title 18 of the United States Code**

I, Michael T.Willis, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in my capacity as an officer of Westaff,Inc. (the “Company”), that, to the best of my knowledge;

(1)             TheQuarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 14,2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date:       May29, 2007

By:      /s/ Michael T. Willis                Michael T. Willis*President and Chief Executive Officer*

A signed original of this written statement requiredby § 906 has been provided to Westaff, Inc. and will be retained by Westaff, Inc.and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.

----
# C_2008051EN.01006003.xml

| 23.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/60 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/60

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 13 December 2007 — Select Appointments v OHIM — Manpower (TELESELECT)

(Case T-202/06) (1)

1

(2008/C 51/111)

Language of the case: English

Language of the case: English

The President of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 294, 2.12.2006.

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6466

QUENTIN L. SMITH,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

ELAINE PINSON, Warden, Walden Correctional Institution,

Respondent - Appellee,

and

JON OZMINT, SCDC Director,

Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Greenville. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.

(6:07-cv-00777-TLW)

Submitted: August 4, 2008 Decided: August 27, 2008

Before MICHAEL, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Quentin L. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy

Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Quentin L. Smith seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Smith has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
# CE2004088EN.01011101.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/111 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/111

---

(2004/C 88 E/0116)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2742/03

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(11 September 2003)

Subject:   Slovakia

Subject:

Is the Commission aware that Slovakia still refuses entry onto its territory of EU citizens who present only an identity card, even children accompanied by their parents presenting a passport?

Does the Commission agree that this reflects poorly on Slovakia's attitude, as a country scheduled to join the Union in a few months time, especially when other countries in the vicinity, whether or not they are about to join the EU (such as Hungary, Croatia, Bosnia and even Serbia-Montenegro) have no difficulty in accepting identity cards issued by EU Member States as a valid proof of identity?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 2003)

(22 October 2003)

Union citizens may travel freely throughout the territory of the Union, simply by holding a valid passport or identity card. Until their accession to the Union, however, there is no obligation on Acceding Countries such as Slovakia or other non-Union states to allow entry onto their territory of Union citizens presenting only an identity card.

Equally, there is no reciprocal obligation on the part of current Member States to allow citizens of Acceding Countries entry onto their territory on simple presentation of an identity card.

The Honourable Member may be aware, for example, that the United Kingdom currently imposes a visa requirement on citizens from the Slovak Republic.

---
II 

★(Star Print)

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 61 

To amend chapter 81 of title 5, United States Code, to authorize the use 

of clinical social workers to conduct evaluations to determine workrelated emotional and mental illnesses. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 4, 2007 

Mr. REID (for Mr. INOUYE) introduced the following bill; which was read twice 

and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 

Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend chapter 81 of title 5, United States Code, to 

authorize the use of clinical social workers to conduct 

evaluations to determine work-related emotional and 

mental illnesses. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Clinical Social Work5 ers’ Recognition Act of 2007’’. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

S 61 IS1S 

1 SEC. 2. EXAMINATIONS BY CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKERS 

2 FOR FEDERAL WORKER COMPENSATION 

3 CLAIMS. 

4 Section 8101 of title 5, United States Code, is 

5 amended— 

6 (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘and osteo7 pathic practitioners’’ and inserting ‘‘osteopathic 

8 practitioners, and clinical social workers’’; and 

9 (2) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘osteopathic 

10 practitioners’’ and inserting ‘‘osteopathic practi11 tioners, clinical social workers,’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

March 22, 2019 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

JAQUAN ISAIAH WILLIAMS, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-666

) 

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. ) 

) 

Upon the court's own motion, this court's opinion dated March 20, 2019, is 

withdrawn. A substitute opinion will be forthcoming.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING IS A 

TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL COURT ORDER.

MARY ELIZABETH KUENZEL, CLERK

cc: 

AA, AE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          NOV-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                            JAN-31-1999
<CASH>                                      302,540
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                               704,436
<ALLOWANCES>                                (57,492)
<INVENTORY>                              12,013,930
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  0
<PP&E>                                    2,627,344
<DEPRECIATION>                             (609,167)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           17,168,531
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             0
<BONDS>                                  10,496,482
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                  2,905,514
<OTHER-SE>                                1,974,454
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             17,168,531
<SALES>                                   1,862,809
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          1,898,161
<CGS>                                     1,493,852
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             1,868,029
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            5,328
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              41,010
<INCOME-TAX>                                 16,700
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               0
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                 24,310
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 178 (Thursday, September 15, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 54541]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18304]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS ADVISORY BOARD


Notice of Accounting and Auditing Policy Committee Meetings for 
2006

    Board Action: Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3511(d), the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), as amended, and the FASAB Rules of 
Procedure, as amended in April, 2004, notice is hereby given that the 
Accounting and Auditing Policy (AAPC), a permanent committee 
established by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) 
will meet on the following dates in room 6N30 of the GAO Building 
unless otherwise noted:

--Tuesday, January 24, 2006
--Tuesday, March 14, 2006
--Tuesday, May 9, 2006
--Tuesday, July 18, 2006
--Tuesday, September 12, 2006
--Tuesday, October 31, 2006

    The purposes of the meetings are to discuss issues related to:

--Heritage Assets and Stewardship Land Implementation,
--Inter-Entity Cost Implementation, and
--Any other topics as needed.

    A more detailed agenda can be obtained from the Web site (http://fasab.gov/aapc/aapc.html) one week prior to each meeting.
    Any interested person may attend the meetings as an observer. Board 
discussion and reviews are open to the public. GAO Building security 
requires advance notice of your attendance. Please notify FASAB of your 
planned attendance by calling 202-512-7350 at least one day prior to 
the respective meeting.
    For Further Information, Contact: Wendy M. Comes, Executive 
Director, 441 G St., NW., Mail Stop 6K17V, Washington, DC 20548, or 
call (202) 512-7350.

    Authority: Federal Advisory Committee Act. Pub. L. No. 92-463.

    Dated: September 9, 2005.
Charles W. Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-18304 Filed 9-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1610-01-M
# C_2013147EN.01003101.xml

| 25.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 147/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 147/31

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 30 January 2013 — De Luca v Commission

(Case F-20/06)

(Civil service - Officials - Referral back to the General Court after annulment - Appointment - Official advancing to a higher function group by open competition - Candidate placed on a reserve list prior to the entry into force of the new Staff Regulations - Transitional rules governing classification in grade at the time of recruitment - Classification in grade pursuant to the new rules - Article 12(3) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations)

2013/C 147/55

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Patrizia De Luca (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, and J.-N. Louis, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Annulment of the Commission’s decision of 23 February 2005 appointing the applicant, an official already graded at A*10 and a successful candidate in a competition for grades A5/A4, to a post as an administrator in the Directorate-General for Justice, Freedom and Security in so far as it alters her classification in grade from A*10 to A*9.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Declares that Mrs De Luca and the European Commission must bear their own costs in the two sets of proceedings brought before the Tribunal; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Declares that Mrs De Luca and the European Commission must bear their own costs in the two sets of proceedings brought before the Tribunal;

| 3. | Declares that the European Commission must bear its own costs and orders it to pay the costs of Mrs De Luca incurred in the proceedings brought before the General Court of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Declares that the European Commission must bear its own costs and orders it to pay the costs of Mrs De Luca incurred in the proceedings brought before the General Court of the European Union;

| 4. | Declares that the Council of the European Union must bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Declares that the Council of the European Union must bear its own costs.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-1093

MARTIAL NIMBO KELOJOU,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. 

Submitted: August 22, 2008 Decided: September 12, 2008

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edward Dosa-Wea Neufville, III, MORAISNEUFVILLE LAW FIRM, LLC,

Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Gregory G. Katsas, Acting

Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant

Director, Andrew B. Insenga, Office of Immigration Litigation,

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for

Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
*We find no support for Kelojou’s assertion that he filed a

motion for remand with the Board in August 2006. Accordingly, we

lack jurisdiction over the claims raised in his brief, which all

pertain to the motion for remand, on the ground that we lack

jurisdiction to consider such claims in the first instance. See 8

U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) (2000) (“A court may review a final order of

removal only if . . . the alien has exhausted all administrative

remedies available to the alien as of right.”); Asika v. Ashcroft,

362 F.3d 264, 267 n.3 (4th Cir. 2004) (holding that the court lacks

jurisdiction to consider an argument that was not raised before the

Board). 

2

PER CURIAM:

Martial Nimbo Kelojou, a native and citizen of Cameroon,

petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals (“Board”) dismissing his appeal from the immigration

judge’s denial of his request for adjustment of status. Based on

our review of the record and Kelojou’s concession that the

immigration judge lacks jurisdiction over his application for

adjustment of status, we deny the petition for review for the

reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Kelojou (B.I.A. Dec. 7,

2007).* We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED