alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 12
                         JOSTENS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
          COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES (UNAUDITED)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                 Six months ended                               Years ended
                                              ---------------------   --------------------------------------------------------------
                                               June 29,    June 30,   December 29,    December 30, January 1,  January 2, January 3,
Dollars in thousands                             2002        2001         2001            2000        2000        1999       1998
-------------------------------------------------------------------   --------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                           <C>         <C>         <C>             <C>          <C>         <C>        <C>
Earnings
Income (loss) from continuing operations
before income taxes                           $  73,693   $  57,632   $    26,540      $ (10,468)   $ 43,999    $ 35,952   $ 52,379

Interest expense
(excluding capitalized interest)                 35,468      41,816        79,035         60,252       7,486       7,026      6,866

Portion of rent expense under
long-term operating leases
representative of an interest factor                720         644         1,164          1,121       1,483       1,233      2,133

-------------------------------------------------------------------   --------------------------------------------------------------
Total earnings                                $ 109,881   $ 100,092   $   106,739      $  50,905    $ 52,968    $ 44,211   $ 61,378
===================================================================   ==============================================================

Fixed charges
Interest expense
(including capitalized interest)              $  35,468   $  41,816   $    79,035      $  60,252    $  7,887    $  7,729   $  6,866

Portion of rent expense under
long-term operating leases
representative of an interest factor                720         644         1,164          1,121       1,483       1,233      2,133

-------------------------------------------------------------------   --------------------------------------------------------------
Total fixed charges                           $  36,188   $  42,460   $    80,199      $  61,373    $  9,370    $  8,962   $  8,999
===================================================================   ==============================================================

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                  3.0         2.4           1.3            0.8         5.7         4.9        6.8
</TABLE>
#### Walter K. LAWSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DIRECTIONS IN RESEARCH, INC., Defendant—Appellee.

No. 04-55896.

D.C. No. CV-04-00941-NAJ/AJB.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*181Submitted April 4, 2005.*

Decided April 7, 2005.

Walter K. Lawson, San Diego, CA, pro se.

Before KOZINSKI, HAWKINS, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Walter K. Lawson appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his petition for an emergency injunction against his employer, Directions in Research, Inc. for garnishing his wages to pay California state taxes. The district court also dismissed Lawson’s case on the merits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 1292(a)(1), and we affirm.

The district court properly denied Lawson’s request for an emergency injunction because Lawson failed to show that he would suffer irreparable injury without injunctive relief. *See Elias v. Connett,*908 F.2d 521, 526-27 (9th Cir.1990) (holding that monetary harm does not constitute irreparable injury). The district court also properly dismissed Lawson’s action on the merits, because the garnishment of wages to collect taxes is not “an invasion of the taxpayer’s personal effects or premises.” *Maraziti v. First Interstate Bank of California,*953 F.2d 520, 524 (9th Cir.1992) (citation omitted). Lawson’s request for injunctive relief was furthermore barred by the Tax Injunction Act. *See*28 U.S.C. § 1341.

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.
Order entered February 14, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 12 - 01169 - CV JAMES PHELPS , ET AL. , Appellant s V. EFRAIN GARCIA , ET AL . , Appellee s On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4 Dallas County, Texas Tri al Court Cause No. CC - 10 - 07686 

### O RDER The Court has before it appellant James Phelps’s February 11, 2013 third motion to extend time to file appellant’s brief and appellees’ February 12, 2013 response to that motion. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDER S appellant James Phelps to file his brief by February 18, 2013. No further extensions will be granted absent a showing of exceptional circumstances.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

T.L., Appellant

and

U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, FENKELL POST 

OFFICE, Detroit, MI, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 22-0881

Issued: December 14, 2022

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

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On May 23, 2022 appellant, through counsel, sought an appeal from a purported April 7, 

2022 decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP).2 The Clerk of the 

Appellate Boards assigned Docket No. 22-0881.

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 

(FECA).3 This jurisdiction encompasses any final decision issued by OWCP within 180 days of 

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 The case record also contains a March31, 2022 merit decision of OWCP. As counsel did not appeal from this 

decision, the Board will not consider it in this appeal. See 20 C.F.R. § 501.3; see also D.E., Docket No. 21-0531 

(issued June 16, 2021). 

3

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq; 20 C.F.R. §§501.2(c) and 501.3(a).
2

the date appellant filed her appeal.4 The Board notes that the case record does not contain a final 

adverse decision of OWCP dated April 7, 2022.

5

 

As there is no final adverse decision of OWCP, appealed by counsel within 180 days of 

the filing of this appeal, the Board concludes that the appeal docketed as Docket No. 22-0881 must 

be dismissed.6 Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 22-0881 is dismissed.

Issued: December 14, 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

4

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 OWCP.”

5

See Order Dismissing Appeal, J.H., Docket No. 21-1193 (issued March 15, 2022).

6 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).
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

November 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

134927 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 134927 

 COA: 268124 

Macomb CC: 2005-002448-FC 

CORNELIUS HANNIBAL DUNSON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 7, 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. 

p1119 

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. 

November 29, 2007 

 Clerk
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5643 

To amend the Toxic Substances Control Act to prohibit the use, production, 

sale, importation, or exportation of the poison sodium fluoroacetate 

(known as ‘‘Compound 1080’’) and to prohibit the use of sodium cyanide 

for predator control. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 30, 2010 

Mr. DEFAZIO (for himself, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. HINCHEY, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, Mr. 

MCGOVERN, Mrs. MALONEY, Ms. MCCOLLUM, Mr. TIERNEY, Mr. SMITH

of Washington, and Mr. KUCINICH) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition 

to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend the Toxic Substances Control Act to prohibit 

the use, production, sale, importation, or exportation of 

the poison sodium fluoroacetate (known as ‘‘Compound 

1080’’) and to prohibit the use of sodium cyanide for 

predator control. 

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


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5643 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Compound 1080 and 

3 Sodium Cyanide Elimination Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE, PRODUCTION, SALE, IMPOR5 TATION, OR EXPORTATION OF COMPOUND 

6 1080. 

7 Section 6 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 

8 U.S.C. 2605) is amended by adding at the end the fol9 lowing new subsection: 

10 ‘‘(g) COMPOUND 1080.—The use, production, sale, 

11 importation, or exportation of sodium fluoroacetate 

12 (known as ‘Compound 1080’) is prohibited. Any person 

13 who violates this subsection shall be fined under title 18, 

14 United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, 

15 or both.’’. 

16 SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON USE OF SODIUM CYANIDE FOR 

17 PREDATOR CONTROL. 

18 (a) PROHIBITED ACT.—Sodium cyanide may not be 

19 used in a predator control device. 

20 (b) PENALTY.—Whoever uses sodium cyanide in a 

21 predator control device shall be fined under title 18, 

22 United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, 

23 or both. 

24 (c) PREDATOR CONTROL DEVICE.—In this section, 

25 the term ‘‘predator control device’’ means— 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5643 IH

1 (1) a dispenser designed to propel sodium cya2 nide when activated by an animal; and 

3 (2) any other means of dispensing sodium cya4 nide, including in the form of sodium cyanide cap5 sules, for wildlife management or other animal con6 trol purposes. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
Local Rule 47.5 provides: “The publication of opinions that

have no pre cedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession.” Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ Nos. 95-20133 95-20135 (consolidated)

__________________

IN THE MATTER OF: CENTRIZ OF NORTH AMERICA, INC., Debtor,

JUAN E. JOCHAMOWITZ and LUIS BLOMBERG, Appellants,

versus
CARLOS E. MENDEZ-PENATE and HOLLAND & KNIGHT, Appellees.

__________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Southern District of Texas

(CA-L-95-001)

__________________________________________

December 12, 1995 Before GARWOOD, SMITH and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. *

PER CURIAM:

We decline to reexamine our June 15, 1995 order dismissing the appeal of Centriz of North America. It is essentially undisputed2

tha t the bankruptcy court did not disqualify attorney Besing as

counsel for appellants Juan E. Jochamowitz and Luis Blomberg;
therefore, the district court erred in holding that they did not give timely notice of appeal from the bankruptcy court’s judgment

and in dismissing their appeals for that reason. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court dism issing, for want of timely
notice of appeal, the appeals of Jochamowitz and Blomberg is reversed and the cause as to Jochamowitz and Blomberg is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent herein.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Written Statement of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350**

 

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Interstate Power and Light Company (the “Company”), hereby certify, based on our knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

/s/ William D. Harvey

William D. Harvey

Chief Executive Officer

 

/s/ Eliot G. Protsch

Eliot G. Protsch

Chief Financial Officer

 

November 8, 2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM JOSTENS INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
JULY 4, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-02-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-04-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-04-1998
<CASH>                                          11,415
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  127,614
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (7,667)
<INVENTORY>                                     82,547
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               247,426
<PP&E>                                         248,801
<DEPRECIATION>                               (168,439)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 390,407
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          247,057
<BONDS>                                          3,589
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,382
<OTHER-SE>                                     113,184
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   390,407
<SALES>                                        467,156
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               467,156
<CGS>                                          211,232
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  211,232
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               172,268
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   906
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,622
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 81,034
<INCOME-TAX>                                    32,906
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             48,128
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    48,128
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.28
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.2

I, Richard L. Browdy, certify, that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of OptimumBank Holdings, Inc.;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The small business issuers other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.

5.

The small business issuers other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer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 a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.



|                         |  |     |                                           
|------------------------ |  | --- | ------------------------------------------
|Date:  November 10, 2006 |  | By: | /s/ RICHARDL. BROWDY                      
|                         |  |     | Richard L. Browdy, Chief Financial Officer
|     |                                                                                                                         |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (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. |

|                             |
|-----------------------------|
|                             |  |  |
| Date: November 2, 2016 | By | /s/ Abu M. Arif |
|                        |   | Abu M. Arif |
|                        |   | Chief Executive Officer |
|                        |   | (Principal Executive Officer) |
|                        |   |   |
| Date: November 2, 2016 | By | /s/ Janet C. Langner |
|                        |   | Janet C. Langner |
|                        |   | Chief Financial Officer |
|                        |   | (Principal Financial Officer) |