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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SEC 10Q AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS INTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                              MAY-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1998
<CASH>                                            4334
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     4284
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                       3704
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 13830
<PP&E>                                            6842
<DEPRECIATION>                                     471
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   20730
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             6639
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          1592
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     20730
<SALES>                                          15328
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 15328
<CGS>                                            13727
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    15212
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    116
<INCOME-TAX>                                        42
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        74
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .07
        

</TABLE>
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1-5 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1-5 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1-5 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 3 of 3
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23



INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-62566 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 333-53449 on Form S-8,
Amendment No. 2 to Registration Statement No. 33-52196 on Form S-3 and
Registration Statement No. 333-49883 on Form S-4 of American Pacific Corporation
of our report dated November 13, 2001 appearing in this Annual Report on Form
10-K of American Pacific Corporation for the year ended September 30, 2001.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Las Vegas, Nevada
November 30, 2001
#### Anne Alexandra SEARS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DISTRICT 4 PINON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, its agents, representatives and assigns; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 04-16582.

D.C. No. CV-03-01586-FJM.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 23, 2005.*

Decided April 11, 2005.

Anne Alexandra Sears, Franklin, TN, pro se.

Donald Peder Johnsen, Esq., Gallagher & Kennedy, P.A., Phoenix, AZ, 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).

MEMORANDUM**

Anne Alexandra Sears appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment for defendants in her action alleging that the failure to renew her contract with the Pinon Unified School District amounted to a denial of due process in violation of Title 25 of the United States Code, retaliatory discharge, and wrongful interference with a worker’s compensation claim. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *United States v. City of Tacoma,*332 F.3d 574, 578 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Sears’ due process claim under Title 25 because Sears was employed by a public school, not one operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. *See 25*U.S.C. § 2021(4).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Sears’ state-law claims because she failed to file the requisite presuit notice of claim. *See*A.R.S. § 12-821.01(A); *Andress v. City of Chandler,*198 Ariz. 112, 7 P.3d 121, 122-23 (2000).

The district court properly dismissed Sears’ worker’s compensation claim because the Arizona Industrial Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over complaints involving alleged unfair claim processing practices or bad faith by an employer. *See*A.R.S. § 23-930(A).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in transferring the case to the District of Arizona, because all the defendants and witnesses save for Sears were residents of Arizona, the events from which the action arose transpired in Arizona, and the claims were governed by Arizona state law. *See Lou v. Belzberg,*834 F.2d 730, 739 (9th Cir.1987).

Sears’ remaining contentions lack merit.

We deny Appellees’ motion for fees and costs pursuant to Fed. RApp. P. 38 without prejudice to renewal in a separate motion.

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.
Case 2:05-cv-09559-VM-HBP Document 12 Filed 02/17/2006 Page 1 of 1
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE

.

IN THE 

## A RIZONA 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEALS

D IVISION O NE

STATE OF ARIZONA , Respondent ,

v.
MICHAEL JOE VALLEJOS , Petitioner

.
N o . 1 CA

- CR 18

- 04 45 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Coconino County

No. S0300CR201400637 The Honorable Dan R. Slayton , Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELI EF DENIED

COUNSEL

Coconino C ounty Attorney’s Office, Flagstaff By Ammon David Barker Counsel for Respondent

Gonzalez & Smith P.C., Chandler By Alex D. Gonzalez Counsel for Petitioner FILED 9-25-2018STATE v. VALLEJOS Decision of the Court

2 MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Kenton D. Jones, Vice Chief Judge Peter B. Swann , and Judge David D. Weinzweig delivered the decision of the Court.

P E R C U R I A M :
¶1 Michael Vallejos seeks review of the superior court’s o rder dismissing his petition for post

- conviction relief , filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is the petitioner’s first petition

. ¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this Court will not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post

- conviction relief. State v. Gutierrez , 229 Ariz. 573, 576

- 77, ¶ 19 (2012). It is the petitioner’s burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion in denying the petition. See State v. Poblete , 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011).
¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior court’s order denying the petition for post

- conviction relief, and the pe tition for r eview. We find that the petitioner has not shown any abuse of discretion.
¶4 Accordingly, we grant review and deny relief.
Exhibit 23.1

LOGO

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Form S-8 Nos. 333-121457
and 333-156465 of Epoch Holding Corporation and 33-86078 of Jackpot Enterprises, Inc., and Registration Statement Form S-3
Nos. 333-139443 and 333-143163 of Epoch Holding Corporation, of our report dated September 8, 2010 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K
of Epoch Holding Corporation (formerly known as J Net Enterprises, Inc. and Jackpot Enterprises, Inc.) for the year ended June 30, 2010.

GRAPHICCF & Co., L.L.P.


Dallas,
Texas
September 8, 2010

---



QuickLinks
Case 1:07-cv-03208-LAP     Document 7      Filed 06/09/2008     Page 1 of 1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                          18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                          AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
               SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Intergraph Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Larry
J. Laster, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 the
Company.


/s/ Larry J. Laster
--------------------
Larry J. Laster
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
March 27, 2003


[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Intergraph Corporation and will be retained by Intergraph
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.]
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATIONS OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERUNDER SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the filing by ARTISTdirect, Inc. (the“Registrant”) of its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,2008 (the “Annual Report”) with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, NeilMcCarthy, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

(2)           The information contained inthe Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Registrant.

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
| Date:     April 15,  2009 | By:    | /s/ RENE ROUSSELET             |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------|
|                                               |   | Rene Rousselet                 |
|                                               |   | Corporate Controller           |
|                                               |   | (Principal Accounting Officer) |

 

----
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 

10, 2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-13-00675-CV

THOMAS R. WRIGHT AKA THOMAS RANEY WRIGHT AKA TR 

WRIGHT, Appellant

V.

MOHAMED A. SABBAHI, Appellee

On Appeal from the 157th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2010-38233

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from a judgment signed June 17, 2013. On September 27, 

2013, appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. 

The motion is granted. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, McCally, and Donovan.
Case 7:04-cv-08928-KMK-LMS     Document 11      Filed 12/07/2004     Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.2

                      UNANIMOUS CONSENT OF DIRECTORS OF
                               KOSS CORPORATION


        The undersigned, constituting all of the directors of Koss Corporation,
a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), do hereby consent and agree to the
adoption of the following resolutions:

        WHEREAS, the Compensation Committee has recommended that the following  
        Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan be approved for Michael J. Koss;

        WHEREAS, the Board of Directors believes it is in the best interests of
        the Company to adopt the following Supplemental Executive
        Retirement Plan for Michael J. Koss;

        NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Michael J. Koss shall receive
        annual cash compensation following his retirement from the Company
        (the "Retirement Payments") in an amount equal to 2% of the base salary
        of Michael J. Koss, multiplied by his number of years of service to the
        Company (example 2% multiplied by 25 years is 50% of base salary).  The
        base salary shall be calculated using the average base salary for
        Michael J. Koss during the three years preceding his retirement.  The
        Retirement Payments shall be paid to Michael J. Koss monthly until his
        death, and after the death of Michael J. Koss the Company shall
        continue to make the Retirement Payments monthly to the surviving
        spouse of Michael J. Koss until her death.

        This Unanimous Consent of Directors may be executed in one or more
counterparts each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and all of which
taken together shall constitute one and the same document.

        Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 7th day of March, 1997.
                                            ---        ------

            /s/                                 /s/
            --------------------                -----------------------
            John C. Koss                        Thomas L. Doerr


           /s/                                  /s/
           ----------------------               -----------------------
           Lawrence S. Mattson                  John Stollenwerk           

           /s/                                  /s/
           ----------------------               -----------------------
           Martin F. Stein                      Victor L. Hunter
Case 1:07-cv-03321-PKC Document 4 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 1 of 1
##### 



EXHIBIT 32 WRITTEN STATEMENT PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Jefferson-Pilot Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned, Dennis R. Glass, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and
Theresa M. Stone, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certify
that, to his or her knowledge:  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company /s/ Dennis R. Glass Dennis R. Glass
Chief Executive Officer
May 7, 2004 /s/ Theresa M. Stone Theresa M. Stone
Chief Financial Officer
May 7, 2004
#### ANNIE MAE G. SMITH v. ADDIS PITTARD CATES.

(Filed 9 March, 1966.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Cowper, J.,*December 1965 Session of DupliN.

Action *ex delicto*to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly caused by the actionable negligence of defendant in the operation of his automobile which struck plaintiff, a pedestrian.

The defendant in his answer denied that he was negligent, and conditionally pleaded contributory negligence of plaintiff as a bar to any recovery by her.

Plaintiff and defendant offered evidence, and the following issues were submitted to the jury and answered as appear:

“1. Was the plaintiff injured by the negligence of the defendant as alleged in the complaint?

“Answer: No.

“2. Did the plaintiff by her own negligence contribute to her injuries?

“Answer: .

“3. What amount, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover of the defendant?

“Answer: .”

From a judgment upon the verdict that plaintiff recover nothing from defendant, and that, defendant recover the costs of the action from plaintiff, plaintiff appeals to the Supreme Court.

*George B. Kornegay, Jr. and Henson P. Barnes for plaintiff appellant.*

*Rivers D. Johnson, Jr., for defendant appellee.*

Per Curiam.

The jury, under application of settled principles of law, found as its verdict that plaintiff was not injured by the *674negligence of defendant as alleged in the complaint. A careful examination of plaintiff’s assignments of error discloses no new question or matter requiring extended discussion. Neither reversible nor prejudicial error has been made to appear. The verdict and judgment will be upheld.

No error.

Moobe, J., not sitting.
Order entered July 5, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-01274-CR

RANDALL CHARLES PLOWMAN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 219-81701-2014

ORDER

Appellant’s June 30, 2016 motion for an extension of time to file his pro se response to 

counsel’s Anders brief is GRANTED IN PART. The Court grants relief to the extent we 

EXTEND the time to file appellant’s pro se response until August 12, 2016.

The Clerk is DIRECTED to transmit a copy of this order to Randall Charles Plowman 

and to counsel for appellant and the State.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
Case 1:06-cv-14985-AKH Document 4 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 25, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-50149 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MARTIN MARQUEZ-PLIEGO, also known as Martin Mancera, also known as Jose Rojas, also known as Jose Rojas-Villarreal, also known as Hector M. Mendoza, also known as Martine Garcia-Torres, also known as Martin Garcia, also known as Martin Torres, also known as Marcos Martin, also known as Carlos Carranva, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-02-CR-248-ALL-JN

-------------------- Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Martin Marquez-Pliego appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Marquez complains that his sentence was improperly enhanced pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) based on a prior conviction. HeNo. 03-50149 -2- argues that the sentencing provision is unconstitutional. Marquez thus contends that his sentence should not exceed the maximum terms of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Marquez acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
Case 1:07-cr-00349-DAB Document 12 Filed 06/24/2008 Page 1 of 1
exv10w1





Exhibit
10.1



Amendment to Employment Agreement




     This Amendment dated as of May 15, 2009 (the “Amendment”) relates to the Employment
Agreement dated August 28, 2007 between RXi Pharmaceuticals Corporation (“Employer”) and
Stephen J. DiPalma (“Employee”) (the “Agreement”).



     WHEREAS, Employer and Employee entered into the Agreement under which Employee is to serve as
Employer’s Chief Financial Officer on the terms set forth in the Agreement;



     WHEREAS, Employer and Employee desire to amend the Agreement as a consequence of the
Compensation Committee’s vote to delete subparagraph 5.1(g) from the Agreement;



     NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the
parties hereto agree with each other that the Agreement shall be amended further, effective as of
the date hereof, as follows:



     Changes to Agreement:



     Article 5.1 is hereby amended as follows:



     “Subparagraph 5.1(g) is hereby deleted in its entirety.”



     IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be duly executed by
authorized representatives as of the day and year indicated above.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	RXi PHARMACEUTICALS CORP.	 	STEPHEN J. DIPALMA	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	 	 	 	 	By:	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Name:
	 	Tod Woolf, Ph.D.	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Title:
	 	President and CEO
Case 1:07-cv-03288-RPP Document 29-2 Filed 03/24/2008 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03288-RPP Document 29-2 Filed 03/24/2008 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03288-RPP Document 29-2 Filed 03/24/2008 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03288-RPP Document 29-2 Filed 03/24/2008 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-03288-RPP Document 29-2 Filed 03/24/2008 Page 5 of 5
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350), the undersigned, David N. Keys, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer of American Pacific Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to his knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2003 of the Company (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|   | /s/ DAVID N. KEYS                                                                                |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                  |
|   | **David N.   Keys   Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer** |
|   |                                                                                             |
|   | December 18, 2003                                                                                |
#### STATE v. WRAY and WOODS

No. 241 PC.

Case below: 30 N.C. App. 259.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 1 September 1976. Appeal of defendant Woods dismissed ex mero motu for lack of substantial constitutional question 1 September 1976.
Case 1:07-cv-03251-JSR Document 5 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-03251-JSR Document 5 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 2 of 2