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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                           SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      23,170
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                               90,979
<ALLOWANCES>                                (2,134)
<INVENTORY>                                 28,218
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           153,271
<PP&E>                                     321,195
<DEPRECIATION>                            (135,490)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             399,649
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       74,264
<BONDS>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    15,976
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<OTHER-SE>                                 298,873
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               399,649
<SALES>                                    259,326
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           259,326
<CGS>                                      174,592
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              174,592
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,030
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             668
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             31,489
<INCOME-TAX>                                10,558
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         21,437
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                21,437
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 1.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 1.31
        















</TABLE>
**Avis juridique important**

*|*

# 32001D0612

**2001/612/EC: Commission Decision of 20 July 2001 amending for the fifth time Decision 2000/284/EC establishing the list of approved semen collection centres for imports of equine semen from third countries (Text with EEA relevance) (notified under document number C(2001) 2216)***Official Journal L 214 , 08/08/2001 P. 0051 - 0060*

Commission Decision

of 20 July 2001

amending for the fifth time Decision 2000/284/EC establishing the list of approved semen collection centres for imports of equine semen from third countries

(notified under document number C(2001) 2216)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2001/612/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July 1992, laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A(I) to Directive 90/425/EEC(1), as last amended by Commission Decision 95/176/EC(2), and in particular Article 17(3)(b) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Commission Decision 2000/284/EC(3), as last amended by Decision 2001/392/EC(4), established the list of approved semen collection centres for imports of equine semen from third countries.

(2) The competent authorities of the United States of America officially informed the Commission of the approval in accordance with the provisions of Directive 92/65/EEC of eight additional equine semen collection centres, and the need to change certain details of two other equine semen collection centres.

(3) Furthermore, the competent authorities of the United States of America officially informed the Commission that the approval has been withdrawn from the two centres Honor Bright Farm (00CA009-EQS) and Burchett Training Center (98GA002-EQS).

(4) It is appropriate to amend the list in the light of new information received from the non-member country concerned, and to highlight the amendments in the Annex for clarity.

(5) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Annex to Decision 2000/284/EC is replaced by the Annex to this Decision.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 20 July 2001.

For the Commission

David Byrne

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, p. 54.

(2) OJ L 117, 24.5.1995, p. 23.

(3) OJ L 94, 14.4.2000, p. 35.

(4) OJ L 138, 22.5.2001, p. 22.

ANEXO/BILAG/ANHANG/ΠΑΡΑΡΤΗΜΑ/ANNEX/ANNEXE/ALLEGATO/BIJLAGE/ANEXO/LIITE/BILAGA

>TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6009

In Re: SHONE EDWARD WILKES,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(No. 5:04-cv-01304)

Submitted: February 15, 2007 Decided: February 26, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Shone Edward Wilkes, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Shone Edward Wilkes petitions for a writ of mandamus,

alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28

U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. He seeks an order from this court

directing the district court to act. We find there has been no

undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, although we grant

leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition.

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
#### SOLLER CORPORATION, a Nevada Corporation, Appellant, v. W. B. C. DEVELOPMENT a/k/a W. B. C. DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, a Partnership; LAMAR WILSON, FRANK WILSON, FRANK BURKE and PHIL CONVILLE, Partners, Respondents.

No. 10687

August 21, 1980

615 P.2d 956

*Dale W. Beasey,*Las Vegas, for Appellant.

*Deaner, Deaner & Reynolds,*Las Vegas, for Respondents.

2

The Chief Justice designated Hon. David Zenoff, Senior Justice, to sit in this case in place of The Hon. E. M. Gunderson, Justice. Nev. Const, art. 6, § . 19; SCR 10.

OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

In an action to foreclose its labor and materialman’s lien against respondents’ apartment project, appellant, a sheet rock *705and painting contractor, recovered $2,601.75. Respondents counterclaimed, and recovered $100.00 as damages for slander of title.

On appeal, appellant argues that the trial court erred in awarding it the sum of $2,601.75 rather than the full amount claimed, i.e., $21,269.19. Appellant further contends that respondents failed to prove malice or special damage and, therefore, the court erred in finding appellant had slandered respondents’ title by recording its notice of claim of lien.

In our view, the record amply supports the trial court’s conclusion that appellant was entitled to recover $2,601.75. Where a trial court, sitting without a jury, makes a determination upon conflicting evidence, that determination will not be disturbed on appeal if it is supported by substantial evidence. Harris v. Shell Dev. Corp., 95 Nev. 348, 594 P.2d 731 (1979). The record reflects that in October, 1973, appellant claimed it was owed $192,570.00, under its written and oral contracts, and $12,613.85 for extra work requested by the owners. By our calculations, prior payments made by the respondents, together with the trial court’s award, compensated appellant for this work. The trial court could properly conclude that appellant was not entitled to additional payment. The trial court was not required to accept appellant’s evidence. *See*Heidtman v. Nevada Ind. Comm’n, 78 Nev. 25, 368 P.2d 763 (1962); In re Duffill’s Estate, 57 Nev. 224, 61 P.2d 985 (1936).

The trial court’s finding that appellant had slandered respondents’ title is also supported by the evidence.1*Cf.*Summa Corp. v. Greenspun, 96 Nev. 247, 607 P.2d 569 (1980). Although the trial court erroneously referred to “nominal” damages, we perceive no abuse of discretion in awarding respondents $100.00 as damages resulting from the wrongful recordation of the notice of claim of lien.

Affirmed.

Mowbray, C. J., and Thompson, Manoukian, and Batjer, JJ., and Zenoff, Sr. J.,2 concur.

1

Finding of Fact #13 reads:

> “The actions of the Plaintiff in recording its Lien were intentionally designed to prohibit the Defendants from transferring title to the fifty-six units at Monterey Grand Manor. At the time of the recording of the Lien, Defendants were not indebted to Plaintiff in the sum of $20,196.09, a fact known to Plaintiff. That the recording of said Lien was an attempt by Plaintiff to obtain funds that were not justly due it and as such constituted a slander of title.”
|     |                                                                                                                         |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of 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 the Company. |

|                        |
|------------------------|
|                        |  |
| /s/   Abu M. Arif      |
| Name:                  | Abu M. Arif |
| Title:                 | Chief Executive Officer |
|                   | (Principal Executive Officer) |
| Date:                  | May 4, 2015 |
|                   |
|                   |
| /s/   Ross P. Palacios |
| Name:                  | Ross P. Palacios |
| Title:                 | Chief Financial Officer |
|                   | (Principal Financial Officer) |
| Date:                  | May 4, 2015 |
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

B.P., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU 

OF LAND MANAGEMENT, 

Grand Junction, CO, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-1274

Issued: March 21, 2023

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

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On August 31, 2022 appellant filed a timely appeal from a March 11, 2022 merit decision

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

assigned Docket No. 22-1274.

In a subsequent letter, appellant requested that the appeal be withdrawn. 

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

withdrawal of the appeal should be granted.1 Accordingly,

1 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).
2

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

is granted. The appeal docketed as No. 22-1274 is dismissed.

Issued: March 21, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

S.S., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION, Bloomington, MN,

Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 23-0305

Issued: June 27, 2023

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

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On December 7, 2022 appellant filed an appeal from a purported decision of the Office of 

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

Docket No. 23-0305.

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 (FECA).

1

 This jurisdiction encompasses any final adverse decision issued by OWCP within 

180 days of the date appellant filed her appeal.

2

 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 appeal.3 As there is no final adverse decision issued by OWCP over which the 

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.”

3

Id. The Board notes that the most recent OWCP decision is dated May 16, 2022, in which OWCP accepted 

appellant’s claim for various conditions. Thus, this decision does not constitute a final adverse decision as 

contemplated by 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3.
2

Board may properly exercise jurisdiction, the Board concludes that the appeal docketed as No. 

23-0305 must be dismissed.4 Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 23-0305 is dismissed.

Issued: June 27, 2023

Washington, DC

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

4 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

__________________________________________

J.G., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, LEHI POST OFFICE,

Lehi, UT, Employer 

_________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0105

Issued: May 21, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Alan J. Shapiro, Esq., for the appellant1

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On October 30, 2020 appellant through counsel, filed a timely appeal from a May 5, 2020 

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

Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 21-0105.

In a letter dated April 30, 2021, counsel requested that the appeal be dismissed.

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

dismissal of the appeal should be granted. Accordingly, 

 

1

In all cases in which a representative has been authorized in a matter before the Board, no claim for a fee for legal 

or other service performed on appeal before the Board is valid unless approved by the Board. 20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e). 

No contract for a stipulated fee or on a contingent fee basis will be approved by the Board. Id. An attorney or 

representative’s collection of a fee without the Board’s approval may constitute a misdemeanor, subject to fine or 

imprisonment for up to one year or both. Id.; see also 18 U.S.C. § 292. Demands for payment of fees to a 

representative, prior to approval by the Board, may be reported to appropriate authorities for investigation.
2

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

granted. The appeal docketed as No. 21-0105 is dismissed.

Issued: May 21, 2021

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-40357

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

PAULO SANTIBANEZ-LUVIANO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:12-CR-983-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Paulo Santibanez-Luviano

raises an argument that he concedes is foreclosed by United States v. RodriguezEscareno, 700 F.3d 751, 753-54 (5th Cir. 2012), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 2044

(2013), which held that the sentence enhancement provided for in U.S.S.G.

§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) applies to a conviction for the federal crime of conspiracy to

commit a federal drug-trafficking offense. The appellant’s motion for summary

disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 20, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* 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.

 Case: 13-40357 Document: 00512347479 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/20/2013
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 213 (Friday, November 4, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67181-67182]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as

[[Page 67182]]

amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Mental Health Special 
Emphasis Panel, HIV/AIDS.
    Date: November 18, 2005.
    Time: 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Holiday Inn Select Bethesda, 8120 Wisconsin Ave., 
Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Martha Ann Carey, PhD, RN, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute 
of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., 
Room 6151, MSC 9608, Bethesda, MD 20892-9608, 301/443-1606, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cda0aeacbfa8b48da0aca4a1e3a3a4a5e3aaa2bb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="610c0200130418210c00080d4f0f08094f060e17">[email protected]</span></a>.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.242, 
Mental Health Research Grants; 93.281, Scientist Development Award, 
Scientist Development Award for Clinicians, and Research Scientist 
Award; 93.282, Mental Health National Research Service Awards for 
Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 28, 2005.
Anthony M. Coelho, Jr.,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 05-21994 Filed 11-3-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

January 8, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

134882 & (53) Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 134882 

 COA: 268812 
 Wayne CC: 05-010264-01 

GERRY SHARROB HAMPTON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 2, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to 

remand is DENIED. 

d1217 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

January 8, 2008 

Clerk
**Exhibit 32**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

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

 

In connection with thequarterly report of River Rock Entertainment Authority (the “Authority”) onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on the date hereof (the “Report”),each of the undersigned officers does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that tosuch officers knowledge:

 

(1) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended; and

 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Authority.

 
| By:                     | /s/ DAVID FENDRICK     |   |
|-------------------------|------------------------|--------|
| David Fendrick          |                   |
| Chief Executive Officer |                   |
| November 12, 2010  |                   |
|                    |                   |
| By:                     | /s/ JOSEPH R. CALLAHAN |   |
| Joseph R. Callahan      |                   |
| Chief Financial Officer |                   |
| November 12, 2010  |                   |

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the RiverRock Entertainment Authority and will be retained by the Authority andfurnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.

 

----
CHIEF JUSTICE

 ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

 NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

 DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

 GINA M. BENAVIDES

 GREGORY T. PERKES

 NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

 CECILE FOY GSANGER

NUECES COUNTY COURTHOUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FLOOR

CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361-888-0416 (TEL)

361-888-0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLOOR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 78539

956-318-2405 (TEL)

956-318-2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa

Court of Appeals 

Thirteenth District of Texas 

August 31, 2015

Hon. Steve Wiggins

District Attorney`s Office

1001 Pearl Street

Beaumont, TX 77701

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Lance P. Bradley

McPherson, Hughes, Bradley, Wimberley

3120 Central Mall Drive

Port Arthur, TX 77642

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Re: Cause No. 13-14-00188-CV

Tr.Ct.No. B-191,390

Style: Jefferson County Constables Association v. Jefferson County, Texas

The above-referenced cause has been set for submission without oral argument 

on Monday, September 21, 2015, before a panel consisting of Chief Justice Rogelio

Valdez, Justice Nelda V. Rodriguez and Justice Gregory T. Perkes. 

Very truly yours,

Cecile Foy Gsanger, Clerk

CFG:ch