alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| (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                as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.  |

|         |                                 |                          |
|--------------|--------------------------------------|-------------------------------|
|         |                                 |
|    |                            |                     |
|         | By:                        | /s/              Scott Miller |
|         | Scott              Miller            |
|         | Chief              Executive Officer |

|         |                                 | October              13,              2006 |
|--------------|--------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|         |                                 |
|    |                            |                                  |
|         | By:                        | /s/              Faith Forbis              |
|         | Faith              Forbis            |
|         | Chief              Financial Officer |
|         | October                13, 2006      |
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 210 (Tuesday, November 1, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 65919]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21667]



[[Page 65919]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Center for 
Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, October 27, 2005, 8 a.m. to 
October 27, 2005, 6 p.m. Residence Inn Bethesda, 7335 Wisconsin Avenue, 
Bethesda, MD, 20814 which was published in the Federal Register on 
October 7, 2005, 70 FR 58725-58728.
    The meeting will be held October 28, 2005. The meeting time and 
location remain the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: October 20, 2005.
Anthony M. Coelho Jr.,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 05-21667 Filed 10-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
**Exhibit
      23.1**





**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**





We
      consent
      to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 Nos.
      333-128952 and 333-129771) pertaining to the 1999 and 2004 Stock Option Plan
      and
      Consultants Option Plans of AFP Imaging Corporation of our report dated August
      11, 2006, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule
      of
      AFP Imaging Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
      ended June 30, 2006.





**GOLDSTEIN
      GOLUB KESSLER LLP**





New
      York,
      New York








September
      15, 2006
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF BULL RUN CORPORATION FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          57,579
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,062,351
<ALLOWANCES>                                    82,000
<INVENTORY>                                  5,166,925
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,436,363
<PP&E>                                       5,046,515
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,423,612
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              95,171,531
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,123,580
<BONDS>                                     51,848,547
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       228,362
<OTHER-SE>                                  29,562,381
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                95,171,531
<SALES>                                     29,848,101
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            31,466,021
<CGS>                                       22,102,544
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,323,289
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                21,941
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           4,246,693
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,520,123)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,854,204
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,359,558
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,359,558
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .11
        

</TABLE>
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.B., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, 

Merced, CA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0797

Issued: January 27, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On April 29, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from a March 2, 2021 decision of the 

Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP).1 The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

assigned Docket No. 21-0797.

By letter dated November 17, 2021 and received November 29, 2021, appellant requested 

that the appeal be dismissed.

The Board has duly considered the matter and concludes that appellant’s request for the 

dismissal of the appeal should be granted. Accordingly,

1 Appellant’s AB-1 Form notes that she is appealing from a purported April17, 2021 decision of OWCP; however,

there is no final adverse decision of that date found in the case record. The only final adverse decision of OWCP

which the Board has jurisdiction is the March 2, 2021 decision. 
2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT appellant’s request for the dismissal of the appeal is 

granted. The appeal docketed as No. 21-0797 is dismissed.

Issued: January 27, 2022

Washington, DC

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. WILLIE R. STITT

No. 756SC114

(Filed 7 May 1975)

Appeal by defendant from *Rouse, Judge.*Judgment entered 18 November 1974 in Superior Court, Halifax County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 16 April 1975.

*681
      *Attorney General Edmisten, by Associate Attorney William H. Guy, for the State.*

*H. P. McCoy, Jr., for defendant appellant.*

BRITT, HEDRICK and MARTIN, Judges.

No error.
AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed August 4, 2014.

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 1 3
- 00 923
- CR No. 05
- 13
- 00933
- CR
REBECCA JEAN CAGLE , Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial Distri ct Cou rt Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F 11
- 45513
- P, F10
- 11213
- P 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Moseley, O’Neill, and FitzGerald Opinion b y Justice O’Neill Rebecca Jean Cagle appeals from the adjudication of her guilt for theft of property le ss than $1,500 , having two prior theft convictions and theft of property valued at $1,500 or more but less than $20,000. See T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. § 31.03(a), (e)(4) (West Supp. 2013 ) . The trial court assessed punishment at two years’ confinement in stat e jail in each case

. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which s he concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professiona l evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811

– 12 (Tex. Crim. App.- 2

- [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of
h er ri ght to file a pro se response, but s he did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State , 2014 WL 2865901 (Tex. Crim. App. June 25, 2014) (identifying duties of appellate courts and appellate counsel in Anders cases). We have reviewed the record and cou nsel’s brief

. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824,
82 6

– 2 7 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases)

. We agree the appeals are frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the ap peal s . We affirm the trial court’s judgment s .

Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47 130923F.U05 /Michael J. O'Neill/ MICHAEL J. O’NEILL JUSTICE- 3

- 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

JUDGMENT

REBECCA JEAN CAGLE , Appellant
N o. 05

- 13

- 00923

- CR V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F11

- 45513

- P). Opinion delivered by Justice O’Neill, Justices Moseley and FitzGerald participating.

Based on th e Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED

.

Judgment entered August 4, 2014.- 4

- 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

JUDGMENT

REBECCA JEAN CAGLE , Appellant No. 05

- 13

- 00933

- CR V.
THE STATE OF TE XAS , Appellee Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F10

- 11213

- P). Opinion delivered by Justice O’Neill, Justices Moseley and FitzGerald participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial cour t’s judgment is AFFIRMED

.

Judgment entered August 4, 2014.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JAIME ESTUPINAN-DE LA HOYA,

AKA Jaime Estupian De La Hoya,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 13-72377

Agency No. A077-305-146

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

March 10, 2015** 

Before: FARRIS, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges. 

Jaime Estupinan-De La Hoya, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro

se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying cancellation of removal. We

have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the

FILED

MAR 17 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
agency’s factual findings, Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 847, 850-51 (9th

Cir. 2004), and we deny the petition for review. 

The record does not compel reversal of the agency’s determination that

Estupinan-De La Hoya failed to establish continuous physical presence in the

United States for a period of not less than ten years as required for cancellation of

removal, see 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(A), where he received voluntary return

following an arrest by the State Department and testified that he spent four to six

hours in custody of the Department of Homeland Security during which time

immigration officials probably told him that he would be put in removal

proceedings, see Zarate v. Holder, 671 F.3d 1132, 1135-1138 (9th Cir. 2012)

(noting that the evidence required to show a formal documented process sufficient

to terminate an alien’s continuous physical presence will vary from case to case,

and describing circumstances that constitute a formal documented process in which

voluntary return may interrupt continuous physical presence). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 

2 13-72377
### Appeal No. 2022AP1215 Cir. Ct. No. 2021GN120



### STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS

DISTRICT IV

I N THE MATTER OF THE CONDITION OF 

### R. S.:

J. C.,

P ETITIONER



### - R ESPONDENT



### ,

V



### .

R. S.,

R ESPONDENT



### - A PPELLANT



### . 

### FILED

Feb. 16, 2023

Sheila T. Reiff

Clerk of Court of Appeals



### ERRATA SHEET

Sheila T. Reiff

Clerk of Court of Appeals

Electronic Notice

Court of Appeals District I

Electronic Notice

Court of Appeals District III

Electronic Notice

Christina Plum

, Sarah Motiff

Electronic Notice

Court of Appeals District II

Electronic Notice

Court of Appeals District IV

Electronic Notice Hon. Rhonda L. Lanford

Circuit Court Judge

Electronic Notice

Carlo Esqueda

Clerk of Circuit Court

Dane County Courthouse

Electronic Notice

Joseph W. Kryshak

Electronic Notice

Megan Elizabeth Lyneis

Electronic Notice

Randi L. Othrow

Electronic NoticeNo. 2022AP1215

2 

### PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that corrections were made to footnote 3

and to paragraph 24 in the above

- captioned opinion which was released on

February 16, 2023 . A corrected electronic version in its ent irety is available on t he

court’ s website at www.wicourts.gov.No. 2022AP1215

3
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS               
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-1998               
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998           
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998           
<CASH>                                           2,274,565           
<SECURITIES>                                             0            
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,998,590            
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0            
<INVENTORY>                                              0            
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         0            
<PP&E>                                         132,067,351               
<DEPRECIATION>                                  89,093,837           
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  51,410,460               
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0               
<BONDS>                                                  0               
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0               
<PREFERRED>                                              0               
<COMMON>                                                 0               
<OTHER-SE>                                               0               
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    51,410,460            
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,669,885               
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,157,496               
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          0
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    611,700             
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,100,791               
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0             
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
                                         
                       

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Michelle M. Lantow, Chief Financial Officer, in connection with the amended Report on Form 10-Q/A of McCormick & Schmicks Seafood
Restaurants, Inc. for the quarterly period ended September 26, 2009 (the Report), hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
McCormick & Schmicks Seafood Restaurants, Inc.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ MICHELLE M. LANTOW 
|Michelle M. Lantow     
|Chief Financial Officer

Dated: August 20, 2010
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 18

- 00831

- CV Michael Thomas PAUL, Appellant

v. Miguel LOPEZ , David Padilla, John Stricklin, Javier Zuniga, and San Antonio Television, LLC, Appellees From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas Trial Court No. 18

- 2085

- CV

- A Honorable Jessica Crawford, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Irene Rios, Justice Beth Watkins, Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice Delivered and Filed: August 14, 2019
DIS M ISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION Appellant filed a notice of appeal complaining of a final judgment dismissing his claims under Chapter 27 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code

. See T EX
. C IV
. P RAC

. & R EM
. C ODE A NN
. §§ 27.003, 27.005. Appellant’s brief was originally due on May 7, 2019. When neither the brief nor a motion for extension of time was filed by this date, we issued an order informing appellant that his brief was overdue and directing him to file his brief on or before June 3, 2019. In response, appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file his brief. We granted this motion in part and ordered appellant to file his brief on or before June 26, 2019. We warned appellant that04

- 18

- 00831

- CV

- 2

- no further extensions woul d be granted absent extenuating circumstances. Neither the brief nor a motion for extension of time was filed

. On July 1, 2019, we ordered appellant to file, on or before July 15, 2019, his appellant’s brief and a written response reasonably explaining his failure to file

a brief. We advised appellant that if he failed to file a brief and the written response by the date ordered, we would dismiss th is appeal for want of prosecution. See T E X
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8(a) (1) ; see also T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3(c) (a uthoriz i ng appellate courts to dismiss an appeal when the appellant fails to comply with a court order). Appellant has not filed a brief or otherwise responded to our July 1, 2019 order. We therefore dismiss this appeal.
PER CURIAM
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

K.A., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, OFFICE 

OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE 

CURRENCY, Downers Grove, IL, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0408

Issued: October 7, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se 

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On October 29, 2020 appellant sought appeal from a purported May 1, 2020 decision of 

the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP).

1

 The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

assigned Docket No. 21-0408.

The Board, having duly considered this matter, notes that its jurisdiction is limited to the 

review of final adverse OWCP decisions issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act 

(FECA)2 and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3. This jurisdiction encompasses any final adverse 

decision issued by OWCP within 180 days of the date appellant filed her appeal.3 

11 The Board notes that following the September 8, 2020 decision, OWCP received additional evidence. However, 

the Board’s Rules of Procedure provides: “The Board’s review of a case is limited to the evidence in the case record 

that was before OWCP at the time of its final decision. Evidence not before OWCP will not be considered by the 

Board for the first time on appeal.” 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(1). Thus, the Board is precluded from reviewing this 

additional evidence for the first time on appeal. Id.

2

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a).

3

20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e) provides in pertinent part: “Any notice of appeal must be filed within 180 days from the 

date of issuance of a decision of the OWCP.”
2

Although the case record as transmitted to the Board does contain a document from OWCP 

dated May 1, 2020, it is an informational letter and, thus, does not constitute a final adverse

decision subject to review under 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a). As there is no final adverse 

decision over which the Board may properly exercise jurisdiction, the Board concludes that the 

appeal docketed as No. 21-0408 must be dismissed. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 21-0408 is dismissed.

Issued: October 7, 2021

Washington, DC

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board