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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000769131
<NAME>                        RANCON REALTY FUND V
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                           5,891
<SECURITIES>                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                      178
<ALLOWANCES>                         0
<INVENTORY>                      1,005
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 6,069
<PP&E>                          60,784
<DEPRECIATION>                  15,595
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  54,325
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              671
<BONDS>                         13,806
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                0
<PREFERRED>                          0
<COMMON>                             0
<OTHER-SE>                      39,848
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    54,325
<SALES>                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                 1,867
<CGS>                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                 1,690
<LOSS-PROVISION>                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 326
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   (149)
<INCOME-TAX>                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               (149)
<DISCONTINUED>                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                      0
<CHANGES>                            0
<NET-INCOME>                      (149)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                    (1.48)
<EPS-DILUTED>                    (1.48)
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation of our audits of the
consolidated financial statements, which appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2006.

We hereby consent to the
release of our accountants report dated October 12, 2005 to be included with the audited financial statements and notes to the financial statements as of June 30,2005 that will be included in the SEC Form 10-KSB as of
June 30,2005 to be Edgar filed to the SEC by the Company and/or by its designates.



|                                                                                  
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Madsen & Associates CPAs, Inc. Madsen & Associates CPAs, Inc. October 25, 2005
No. 87-6679.

#### Gorod *v.*Demong et al.

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2464
In Re: PRISCILLA HINES, Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-99-626-5-BO) Submitted: March 6, 2001 Decided: March 19, 2001 Before WILLIAMS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Priscilla Hines, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Priscilla Hines filed this mandamus petition challenging the district court’s remand of her action alleging error in the amount of her social security retirement checks. Because this petition seeks the identical relief sought in an earlier petition filed by Hines, which was denied by this court, and because Hines presents no reason to question the propriety of that decision, we deny mandamus relief. See In re: Hines , No. 00-1924 (4th Cir. Nov. 28, 2000) (unpublished). We dispense with oral argument, because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
No. 11,310.

#### Johnson *v.*Mullinix et al.

*.Drainage.*— Act *of April*21st, *1881.*— Appeal.—Practice.—In a proceeding for the establishment of a drain before the board of commissioners un>der the act of April 21st, 1881, an appeal from the judgment of the board, *165taken by either party to the circuit court, is governed by the provisions? of sections 17 and 18 of that act, and not by the general statute govern-ing appeals from the decisions of boards of commissioners, and no notice of any such appeal need be given the adverse party, either by summons or otherwise.

Filed June 11, 1885.

From the Steuben Circuit Court.

*G. B. Adams, R. Lowry*and *F. T. Hord,*for appellant,,

*D. R. Best,*for appellees.

Elliott, J.

The appellees commenced this proceeding by-filing a petition for the establishment of a ditch under the act of April 21st, 1881. The board of commissioners found, against the petitioners and rendered judgment in favor of the-appellant who was a remonstrant. Within thirty days from the time the judgment of the commissioners was announced, theappellees filed an appeal bond and asked an appeal to the circuit court. The appellant did not appear in the case in the circuit court, and judgment was rendered upon default. From that judgment he prosecutes this appeal, insisting that it is erroneous; because there was no summons issued and served upon him.

We think that the act of 1881 makes special provisions for appeals, and that appeals are governed by those provisions,, and not by the general statute governing appeals from decisions of the board of commissioners. Acts 1881, p. 416, sections 17 and 18. This act does not, as is evident from its; language, require that any summons shall be issued, and no-good purpose can be subserved by causing the issuing and. service of summons in cases where one of the parties takes-the *appeal;*on the contrary, such a course would add greatly to the expense of the proceedings and cause needless delay.. It is reasonable to require parties to take notice of the provision giving thirty days in which to appeal and to ascertain whether the party having the right prescribed by statute has-exercised it. This rule obtains in analogous cases, and there is no reason why it should not apply here.

Judgment affirmed.
Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 News
    
        Photos

    Week in Photos

    Air Force TV

    Commentaries

    Features

    Art

    About Us
    
        Air Force Senior Leaders
    
        SECAF

    CSAF

    CMSAF

    Biographies

    Fact Sheets

    SECAF Reading List

    CSAF Leadership Library
    
        CSAF Leadership Library 2022

    CSAF Leadership Library 2021

    CSAF Reading List Pre-2020 Archive
    
        2018 CSAF Reading List

    2017 CSAF Reading List

    2016 CSAF Reading List

    CSAF Leadership Library 2023

    CMSAF Leadership Library

    50 Years of the CMSAF

    Adjunct Professors

    Air Force Strategic Documents

    Arctic Strategy

    Empowered Airmen

    State Licensure Portability

    Careers

    AF Federal Advisory Committees

    AF 75th Anniversary

    Policy Updates

    AF Content Management

    Contact Us

    AF Sites
    
        Site RegistrationU.S. Air Force LogoAir Force

        Policy UpdatesNewsroomReoptimizationBIOGRAPHIESAF Senior Leaders

    HomeAbout UsBiographiesDisplay      Brig. Gen. James R. AndersenEngage OnFacebook PostsYour browser is incompatible with this widget.
                        
                        View on Twitter
        
        Brig. Gen. James R. AndersenBrigadier General JAMES ROY ANDERSENBorn on May 10, 1904, in Racine, Wisconsin, General James Roy Andersen was graduated from the U.S. Military Academy in 1926. That August, he joined the 2nd Infantry at Fort Sheridan Illinois, and served at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii; the Aberdeen (Maryland) Proving Ground Command and Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey. Andersen as first lieutenant was with the Ordnance Department at Selfridge Field, Michigan from 1932-34. By 1936 he was promoted to captain and began cadet training, getting his wings at Kelly Field, Texas; and assignment to Hickam Field, Hawaii. During World War II he returned to West Point as an instructor, with promotion to colonel by early 1943. That June he went to the War Department General Staff in Plans. Andersen was promoted to brigadier general in January 1945, and went to the Pacific Theater where he was assigned as chief of staff of HQ AAF, Pacific Ocean Areas. He lost his life along with that of his commander, Lieutenant General Millard F. Harmon, Jr. on February 26, 1945, in an aircraft crash between Kwajalein and Johnston Island while en route to Hawaii.
North Field AFB, Guam was renamed Andersen AFB in his honor on October 7, 1949.
Reference:
Dupre, Flint O., Col. USAFR., USAF Biographical Dictionary – Andersen, p. 5
  Quick Links
AccessibilityContact UsEqual OpportunityFOIA | Privacy | Section 508Information QualityInspector GeneralJAG Court-Martial DocketLink DisclaimerNo FEAR ActOpen GovernmentOSI Tip LinePlain LanguageQuestionsResilienceRSSSite MapVeterans Crisis LineCareers
Join the Air ForceAir Force BenefitsAir Force CareersAir Force ReserveAir National GuardCivilian ServiceConnect
            Get Social with Us
            
            Official United States Air Force Website
    Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
EX28_1









 

EX28_2









 

EX28_3









 

EX28_4









 

EX28_5









 

EX28_6









 

EX28_7









 

EX28_8









 

EX28_9









 

EX28_10









 

EX28_11









 

EX28_12









 

EX28_13









 

EX28_14EX28_15









 

EX28_16

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 20 (Monday, February 1, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 5059]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-2189]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Agency Holding the Meeting: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Time and Date: 2 p.m., Monday February 8, 2010.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered: Rule Enforcement Review Meeting.

Contact Person for More Information: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-2189 Filed 1-28-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2147 

To amend Public Law 112–59 to provide for the display of the congressional 

gold medal awarded to the Montford Point Marines, United States Marine Corps, by the Smithsonian Institution and at other appropriate 

locations. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 13, 2014 

Mrs. HAGAN (for herself, Mr. RUBIO, and Mr. NELSON) introduced the following bill; which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and 

passed 

A BILL 

To amend Public Law 112–59 to provide for the display 

of the congressional gold medal awarded to the Montford 

Point Marines, United States Marine Corps, by the 

Smithsonian Institution and at other appropriate locations. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DISPLAY OF CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL BY 

4 THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION. 

5 Section 2 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to grant the 

6 congressional gold medal to the Montford Point Marines’’, 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2147 CPS

1 approved November 23, 2011 (31 U.S.C. 5111 note), is 

2 amended by adding at the end the following: 

3 ‘‘(c) SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION.— 

4 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Following the award of the 

5 gold medal in honor of the Montford Point Marines, 

6 United States Marine Corps, under subsection (a), 

7 the gold medal shall be given to the Smithsonian In8 stitution, where it will be displayed as appropriate 

9 and made available for research. 

10 ‘‘(2) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of 

11 Congress that the Smithsonian Institution should 

12 make the gold medal received under paragraph (1) 

13 available for display elsewhere, particularly at other 

14 appropriate locations associated with the Montford 

15 Point Marines, United States Marine Corps.’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION
 PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  a)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; andb)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date:      March 5, 2010
    By:
    /s/ Ramón M. Ruiz-ComasRamón M. Ruiz-ComasPresident and
Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.3

                         Consent of Proposed Director

     The undersigned hereby consents to serve as a director of Aviation Group,
Inc. if the arrangement contemplated by the Arrangement Agreement dated as of
May 3, 2000 by and among Aviation Group, Inc., Aviation Group Canada Ltd. and
travelbyus.com Ltd. is consummated, and to be named as a potential director of
Aviation Group, Inc. in the Form S-4 Registration Statement for the arrangement
transaction.

                                    By:    /s/ MICHAEL A. FARRUGIA
                                           -----------------------
                                    Name:  Michael A. Farrugia
                                    Date:  May 9, 2000
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ANNUAL
REPORT ON FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          22,439                  22,439
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,565                   9,565
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                        335                     335
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,718                  32,718
<PP&E>                                         278,541                 278,541
<DEPRECIATION>                                 118,568                 118,568
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 119,726                 196,726
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,843                  14,843
<BONDS>                                        124,526                 124,526
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        27,385                  27,385
<OTHER-SE>                                      29,756                  29,756
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   196,726                 196,726
<SALES>                                         12,934                  47,602
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,235                  52,794
<CGS>                                            6,184                  21,447
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   18,287                  68,509
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,148                  13,310
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (4,052)                (15,715)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                    (859)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (4,052)                (14,856)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (4,052)                (14,856)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.45)                  (1.66)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.45)                  (1.66)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

Joint Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal
Financial Officer Required by Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b)

In connection with the Annual Report of Protocall Technologies Incorporated  (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Donald Hoffmann, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.

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

2.

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|               |  |                                                      
|-------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------
|               |  | /s/Bruce Newman                                      
|April 16, 2007 |  | Bruce Newman                                         
|               |  | Chief Executive Officer & Principal Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.10


 


April 4, 2014


 


Board of Directors


Medical Transcription Billing, Corp.


7 Clyde Road


Somerset, NJ 08873


 


Dear Sirs,


 


This letter confirms that I have the ability and intent to provide
financial support, in the form of an equity contribution or a loan, at a market interest rate, of up to $400,000, if and as needed
to enable MTBC to continue as a going concern.


 


Sincerely,


 


	/s/ Mahmud Haq
	Mahmud Haq


 


		Cc:	Deloitte LLP
Exhibit 32.02

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 Quarterly Report of Sbarro, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended July 1, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Anthony J. Puglisi, Vice President-Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of
my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 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: August 14, 2007



|                                          
|------------------------------------------
|/s/ Anthony J. Puglisi                    
|Anthony J. Puglisi                        
|Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|Principal Financial Officer               

NOTE: A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
NICOLE NORRIS,

Plaintiff,

 v.

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE

UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF

COLUMBIA,

Defendant.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Civil Action 05-01122 (HHK)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Nicole Norris brings this action against the Board of Trustees of the University of the

District of Columbia (“Board”) alleging reverse race discrimination in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1

1981 and the D.C. Human Rights Act, D.C. Code § 2-1402.41. The case arises from Norris’s

treatment while she was enrolled as a student in the nursing program at the University of the

District of Columbia.

Before the Court is the Board’s motion for summary judgment [#41] and the

accompanying statement of material facts not in dispute. Norris has not opposed this motion. In

2

There has been some confusion as to the proper defendant in this case. As 1

explained in the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Deborah A.

Robinson [#30], adopted by the Court on September 12, 2008 [#31], the District of Columbia is

not a defendant in this case. The Board replaced the University of the District of Columbia as a

named defendant, by order of the Court granting an unopposed motion filed by Norris, on May

23, 2006.

Norris instead filed in response to defendant’s motion a “Notice of Voluntary 2

Dismissal of This Case.” This type of dismissal is not proper at this stage of the proceedings.

Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permits a plaintiff to dismiss an action only by

filing “a notice of dismissal before the opposition party serves either an answer or a motion for

summary judgment” or “a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” Fed.

R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A) (emphasis added).
accordance with Local Civil Rule 7, because Norris has not controverted the facts identified in

defendant’s statement of material facts, the Court treats such facts as admitted. See LCvR

7(h)(1) (“In determining a motion for summary judgment, the court may assume that facts

identified by the moving party in its statement of material facts are admitted, unless such a fact is

controverted in the statement of genuine issues filed in opposition to the motion.”). Based on

those admitted facts, defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Accordingly, the Court concludes that the Board’s motion should be granted. An

appropriate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.

Henry H. Kennedy, Jr.

United States District Judge

2
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. HUGH MCBAIN DUNCAN.

July 11, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.