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

<ARTICLE>     5
<MULTIPLIER>     1,000

<S>                                <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                       JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                         SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      9-MOS
<CASH>                                                     7,720
<SECURITIES>                                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            383,919
<ALLOWANCES>                                              22,670
<INVENTORY>                                              326,126
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         727,243
<PP&E>                                                   574,807
<DEPRECIATION>                                           278,868
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         1,330,619
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    168,217
<BONDS>                                                  485,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                    0
<COMMON>                                                  52,277
<OTHER-SE>                                               118,560
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           1,330,619
<SALES>                                                1,596,772
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       1,596,772
<CGS>                                                  1,148,830
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          1,148,830
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           2,456
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        27,644
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          131,325
<INCOME-TAX>                                              47,209
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       84,116
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           (2,522)
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                              81,594
<EPS-BASIC>                                                 1.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               1.62



</TABLE>
#### Roger Lewis JENAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Alan D. Jenan, Plaintiff, v. Michael L. ERWIN; et al., Defendants—Appellees.

No. 04-15779.

D.C. No. CV-03-06425-REC.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 23, 2005.*

Decided April 11, 2005.

Roger Lewis Jenan, Visalia, CA, pro se.

James P. Hurlbutt, Visalia, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before B. FLETCHER, TROTT, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

*868MEMORANDUM**

Roger Lewis Jenan appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging that the defendants violated his patent rights in real property by conducting a non-judicial foreclosure of a deed of trust in the property and subsequently pursuing an unlawful detainer action in state court. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Bianchi v. Rylaarsdam,*334 F.3d 895, 898 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.

The district court properly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Jenan’s claims involving a federal land patent. *See Virgin v. County of San Luis Obispo,*201 F.3d 1141, 1143 (9th Cir.2000) (per curiam). The district court also properly found that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Jenan’s constitutional claims pursuant to the *Rooker-Feldman*doctrine as those claims are “inextricably intertwined” with review of a state court decision on issues which were fully and fairly litigated in that forum. *See Doe & Assocs. Law Offices v. Napolitano,*252 F.3d 1026,1029 (9th Cir.2001).

We deny appellees’ request for sanctions without prejudice to filing of a separate motion pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 38 and 9th Cir. Rule 39-1.

We deny all remaining outstanding motions.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         101,605
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  465,929
<ALLOWANCES>                                    36,722
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               530,812
<PP&E>                                         592,138
<DEPRECIATION>                                 318,937
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 806,215
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          291,600
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,223,702
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   806,215
<SALES>                                        143,329
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               143,329
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  172,712
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,865
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,559
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (29,383)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (31,248)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.025)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.025)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 23.2**
**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ CONSENT**
We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.333-75487, 333-91589, 333-94327 and 333-100515 of MetroCorp Bancshares, Inc. onForm S-8 and Registration Statement No. 333-33730 of MetroCorp Bancshares, Inc.on Form S-3 of our report dated February 20, 2002, appearing in this AnnualReport on Form 10-K of MetroCorp Bancshares, Inc. for the year ended December31, 2002.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Houston, Texas
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0574

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

CHARLOTTE ANN WOLFCHILD,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 22, 2023, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 16 2023

08/16/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0574
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Cesar M. Garcia, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that the Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report of IRIS International, Inc. on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of IRIS International, Inc. 

 

Date: July 17, 2009 

 

This certification shall not bedeemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of Section 18 of the Exchange Act. Such certification shall not be deemed to beincorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Forest Service 

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA. 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Siskiyou County Resource Advisory Committee will meet in Yreka, California, November 14, 2005. The meeting will include routine business and the review and recommendation for implementation of submitted project proposals. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held November 14, 2005, from 4 p.m. until 7 p.m. 

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Yreka High School Library, Preece Way, Yreka, California. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Bob Talley, RAC Coordinator, Klamath National Forest, (530) 841-4423 or electronically at                         *rtalley@fs.fed.us.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting is open to the public. Public comment opportunity will be provided and individuals will have the opportunity to address the Committee at that time. 

Dated: October 27, 2005. 

Margaret J. Boland, 

Designated Federal Official. 

[FR Doc. 05-21797  Filed 11-1-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 15, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 04-51321

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 Plaintiff - Appellee

 v.

HOOVER ELIVER CAPACHO-PINTO

 Defendant - Appellant

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

 Appeal from the United States District Court

 for the Western District of Texas

(04-CR-360)

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

Before SMITH, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

IT IS ORDERED that appellee’s unopposed motion to vacate

sentence is granted.

IT IS ORDERED that appellee’s unopposed motion to remand

case to the district court for resentencing in light of the U.S.

Supreme Court’s recent opinion in US v. Booker and this Court’s

opinion in US v. Mares is granted. 

________________

* Pursuant to 5

th 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.
IT IS ORDERED that appellee’s unopposed alternative motion

to extend time to file appellee’s brief 14 days from the Court’s

denial of appellee’s motion to vacate and remand is denied as

moot.
Exhibit 23



LOGO

March 16, 2017

San Juan Basin Royalty Trust

Compass Bank, Trustee

2200 Post Oak Blvd., Floor 18

Houston, Texas 77056

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Cawley,
Gillespie & Associates, Inc. hereby consents to the use of the oil and gas reserve information in the San Juan Basin Royalty Trust Securities and Exchange Commission Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2016 and in the San Juan Basin Royalty Trust Annual Report for the year ended December 31, 2016 based on reserve reports prepared by Cawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc. and dated March 7, 2017.



Sincerely,LOGOCAWLEY, GILLESPIE & ASSOCIATES, INC.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                          5
       
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                       DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                             3,092,521
<SECURITIES>                       000
<RECEIVABLES>                      000
<ALLOWANCES>                       000
<INVENTORY>                        000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   000
<PP&E>                             21,605,442
<DEPRECIATION>                     10,303,382
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     14,544,527
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              1,741,128
<BONDS>                            9,943,036
<COMMON>                           000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>              000
<PREFERRED>                        000
<OTHER-SE>                         2,860,363
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       14,544,527
<SALES>                            3,622,403
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   3,713,685
<CGS>                              000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      1,817,928
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                   1,027,927
<LOSS-PROVISION>                   000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 992,745
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    000
<INCOME-TAX>                       000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                000
<DISCONTINUED>                     000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                    000
<CHANGES>                          000
<NET-INCOME>                       1,285,707
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      15.53
<EPS-DILUTED>                      15.53
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief Financial Officer of Norcraft Holdings, L.P. and Norcraft Companies, L.P. (together, the Company), does hereby certify that to the
undersigneds knowledge:

1) the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006 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
Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|
|

|                   |  |                                                                 
|------------------ |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 15, 2006 |  | /s/ Leigh Ginter                                                
|                   |  | Leigh Ginter  Chief Financial Officer (ChiefAccounting Officer)

A signed original of this written statement, required by Section 906, has been provided to Norcraft Holdings,
L.P. and Norcraft Companies, L.P. and will be retained by Norcraft Holdings, L.P. and Norcraft Companies, L.P. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack,

 Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

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

 March 1 

, 2019

Order 

Clerk

March 1, 2019

158984(70)(71)

In re RAYMOND L. FRICK TRUST.

________________________________________

EDWARD M. KRESS and JENNY FRICK

TRYCHEL, also known as JENI FRICK

TRYCHEL, Successor Co-Trustees,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

SC: 158984

v COA: 341498

Monroe CC: 16-138516-CK

BRADLEY SPICE and BCL 75, INC.,

Defendants-Appellants.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motions for the temporary admission of out-ofstate attorneys Susan D. Solle and Thomas P. Whelley, II, to appear and practice in this 

case under MCR 8.126(A) are GRANTED.
Order entered October 8, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-00571-CV

VISTA FORRENT, LLC AND 3019 SOUTH BOULEVARD, DALLAS, 

TEXAS, Appellants

V.

CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-20-05159

ORDER

On August 31, 2021, after being informed the parties were engaged in 

settlement negotiations, we granted appellants’ motion for extension of time to file 

their brief and ordered them to file their brief, a motion to dismiss the appeal, or 

status report no later than September 30, 2021. To date, appellants have not 

complied or otherwise communicated with the Court. Accordingly, we ORDER 

appellants to file their brief, motion to dismiss, or status report no later than 

October 26, 2021. Because this is an accelerated appeal and the brief was first due 
August 30, 2021, we caution appellants that failure to comply may result in 

dismissal of the appeal without further notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 

42.3(b),(c).

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

A.H., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 

AGRICULTURE MARKETING SERVICE; 

POULTRY GRADING BRANCH, Austin, TX, 

Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0583

Issued: December 7, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On March 1, 2022 appellant sought an appeal from a purported February 15, 2022 merit

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

Boards assigned Docket No. 22-0583.

The Board, having duly considered the matter, notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’Compensation Act.1 

This jurisdiction encompasses any final adverse decision issued by OWCP within 180 days of the 

date appellant filed his appeal.2 By correspondence dated February 15, 2022, OWCP informed 

appellant of its intent to terminate his wage-loss compensation and entitlement to a schedule award 

effective that date as he refused an offer of suitable work, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8106(c)(2). It

determined that appellant’s failure to report to the offered position was not justified as he had not 

submitted evidence that the position was beyond his abilities. This correspondence, however, was 

1

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

2

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

informational in nature and did not include appeal rights.3 Thus, the case record as transmitted to 

the Board does not contain a final adverse decision of OWCP issued within 180 days from the date 

of docketing of the current appeal4 and, therefore, there is no final adverse decision issued by 

OWCP over which the Board may properly exercise jurisdiction. As such, the Board concludes 

that the appeal docketed as No. 22-0583 must be dismissed.5 Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 22-0583 is dismissed.

Issued: December 7, 2022

Washington, DC

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

3 Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2--Claims, Disallowances, Chapter 2.1400.3f (September 2020).

4

See supra note 2.

5 The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date of their issuance.” 

20 C.F.R. § 501.6(d).
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

G.L., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, MARINE 

CORPS BASE CAMP PENDLETON,

Barstow, CA, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-1378

Issued: October 25, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On September 22, 2022 appellant filed an appeal from an October 26, 2020 merit 

decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the 

Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 22-1378.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

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

Act.1 For final adverse decisions of OWCP issued on or after November 19, 2008, the Board’s 

review authority is limited to appeals which are filed within 180 days from the date of issuance 

of OWCP’s decision.2

The 180th day following the October 26, 2020 decision was April 24, 2021. As appellant 

did not file an appeal with the Board until September 22, 2022, more than 180 days after the

October 26, 2020 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 22-1378 is 

untimely filed. The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not 

1

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

2

20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e).
2

explained her failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to 

establish compelling circumstances. Because there is no final adverse decision issued by OWCP 

within 180 days of the filing of the instant appeal, the Board concludes that the appeal docketed 

as No. 22-1378, must be dismissed.3 Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 22-1378 is dismissed.

Issued: October 25, 2022

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

3 The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date of their issuance.” Id.

at § 501.6(d).
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

SHIRLEY J. KEAHEY, 

 Petitioner 

 v. 

EDWARD NELSON, MARY LOU NELSON 

AND ERIC S. WARD, LINDA N. WARD, 

 Respondents 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 276 MAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 4th day of October, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED. 

Justice Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.