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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDING JULY 1, 2000, AND SUCH IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001051260
<NAME>                        GLENOIT ASSET CORPORATION

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                              20
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   55,006
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                55,026
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  55,026
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,767
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      44,259
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    55,026
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,574
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     5
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,653)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,222
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,828
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,394
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,394
<EPS-BASIC>                                       3.39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.39


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350, 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report
of Zi Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Milos Djokovic, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
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/  Milos Djokovic          
|--------------------- | -----------------------------
|                      | Milos Djokovic               
|                      | Chief Executive Officer      
|                      | (principal executive officer)
|Date: March 27, 2009. |                              

---
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2742 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2742

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To extend certain authority of the Supreme Court Police, modify the 
   venue of prosecutions relating to the Supreme Court building and 
  grounds, and authorize the acceptance of gifts to the United States 
                             Supreme Court.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT 
              POLICE TO PROTECT COURT OFFICIALS OFF THE SUPREME COURT 
              GROUNDS.

    Section 6121(b)(2) of title 40, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``2004'' and inserting ``2008''.

SEC. 2. VENUE FOR PROSECUTIONS RELATING TO THE UNITED STATES SUPREME 
              COURT BUILDING AND GROUNDS.

    Section 6137 of title 40, United States Code, is amended by 
striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
    ``(b) Venue and Procedure.--Prosecution for a violation described 
in subsection (a) shall be in the United States District Court for the 
District of Columbia or in the Superior Court of the District of 
Columbia, on information by the United States Attorney or an Assistant 
United States Attorney.''.

SEC. 3. GIFTS TO THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

    The Chief Justice or his designee is authorized to accept, hold, 
administer, and utilize gifts and bequests of personal property 
pertaining to the history of the United States Supreme Court or its 
justices, but gifts or bequests of money shall be covered into the 
Treasury.

            Passed the Senate September 28, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
108th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 2742

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To extend certain authority of the Supreme Court Police, modify the 
   venue of prosecutions relating to the Supreme Court building and 
  grounds, and authorize the acceptance of gifts to the United States 
                             Supreme Court.
```
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Jhovany Guadalupe Felix Soto, 

Defendant.

No. CR-15-1609-PHX-JJT

DETENTION ORDER 

 In accordance with the Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), the issue of 

detention was addressed at a hearing on March 2, 2016. The Court was informed that the 

defendant is subject to other custody and is not eligible for release at this time. 

 The Court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant is subject to 

other custody and should be similarly detained in this case. If circumstances change such 

that defendant is no longer in custody in the other matter, defendant shall have leave to 

request that the matter of detention be reopened in this case. 

 IT IS ORDERED that the defendant be detained pending further proceedings. The 

defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or his designated 

representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, 

from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal. The 

defendant shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity for private consultation with defense 

counsel. On order of the Court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the 

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility shall deliver the defendant to 

Case 2:15-cr-01609-JJT Document 9 Filed 03/03/16 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

the United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a Court 

proceeding. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that should a motion for review/reconsideration of 

this detention order be filed, it is counsel's responsibility to deliver a copy of the motion 

for review/reconsideration to Pretrial Services at least one day prior to the hearing. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if a release to a third party is to be considered, it 

is counsel's responsibility to notify Pretrial Services sufficiently in advance of the hearing 

to allow Pretrial Services an opportunity to interview and investigate the potential third 

party custodian. 

 Dated this 3rd day of March, 2016. 

Case 2:15-cr-01609-JJT Document 9 Filed 03/03/16 Page 2 of 2
#### The State *v.*M’Roberts.

If the description of the offence, in an indictment for kidnapping, agree with the language of the statute, it is sufficient.

Saturday, *December*3,

ERROR to the *Hendricks*Circuit Court.

*W. Herod,*for the state.

*W. Quarles,*for the defendant.

Blackford, J.

Indictment for kidnapping. The indictment states that the defendant, on, &c., with force and arms, &c., one *Susanna,*a woman of colour, then and there being found, did then and there forcibly and unlawfully arrest, carry, and convey away to parts without the state of *Indiana,*to wit, to the state of *Kentucky;*the defendant not having then and there established a claim upon the services of the said *Susanna,*either according to the laws of the state of *Indiana, or*according to the laws of the *United States;*contrary to the form of the statute.

This indictment was quashed, on the defendant’s motion, by the Circuit Court.

The objections made to the indictment are, that it does not state the woman to be free, nor that she was taken feloniously and against her will. These objections are insufficient. The statute has defined the offence and affixed the punishment. Rev. Code, 1831, p. 183. The indictment in question charges, that the woman was forcibly and unlawfully arrested and taken away to another state by the defendant, without his having established his claim to her services, &c. This description of the offence agrees with the language of the statute, and is therefore sufficient.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is *reversed with costs.*Cause remanded, &c.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Wide Awake on the Sea of Tranquillity","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"mYr1Oxb3ZP\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/apollo\/apollo-11\/wide-awake-on-the-sea-of-tranquillity\/\">Wide Awake on the Sea of Tranquillity<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/apollo\/apollo-11\/wide-awake-on-the-sea-of-tranquillity\/embed\/#?secret=mYr1Oxb3ZP\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Wide Awake on the Sea of Tranquillity” — NASA\" data-secret=\"mYr1Oxb3ZP\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/03\/apollo11_capcom.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":450}
<PAGE>   1
EXHIBIT 12

COMPUTATION OF RATIO  OF INCOME TO FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED STOCK DIVIDEND 
REQUIREMENTS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                               For Six Months    For Three Months
                                                   Ended             Ended
                                               June 30, 1998      June 30, 1998
                                               ----------------------------------

<S>                                                <C>                 <C>    
Net income                                         1,407,336           661,719
Fixed charges:
Income before fixed charges                        1,407,336           661,719
Fixed charges, as above                                    0                 0
Preferred stock dividend requirements                900,997           450,225
Fixed charges including preferred
   stock dividends                                   900,997           450,225
Ratio of income to fixed charges and
   preferred stock dividend requirements                1.56              1.47
</TABLE>



                                       11
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

STEVEN JACKSON, DOC #558622, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-2814

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed September 25, 2019. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for 

Hillsborough County; Christopher C. 

Sabella, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and 

Robert Rosen, Assistant Public Defender, 

Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

SLEET, SALARIO, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
Case 2:15-mj-01911-JFM Document 3 Filed 12/10/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01911-JFM Document 3 Filed 12/10/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01911-JFM Document 3 Filed 12/10/15 Page 3 of 3
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Myron SLAUGHTER, a/k/a Wink, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 04-7683.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 18, 2005.

Decided March 10, 2005.

Myron Slaughter, Appellant pro se. Janet S. Reincke, Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Myron Slaughter seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Slaughter has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED*
#### Jo Anne JOHNSON, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 04-2290.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 18, 2005.

Decided March 10, 2005.

Jo Anne Johnson, Appellant pro se. David J. Cortes, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

*108PER CURIAM.

Jo Anne Johnson appeals the district court’s order granting the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration’s (“Commissioner”) motion for judgment and affirming the Commissioner’s denial of supplemental security income benefits. We must uphold the decision to deny benefits if the decision is supported by substantial evidence and the correct law was applied. *See*42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2000); *Craig v. Chater,*76 F.3d 585, 589 (4th Cir.1996). Having thoroughly reviewed the administrative record, we agree with the district court that substantial evidence supports the Commissioner’s final decision denying supplemental security income benefits. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See Johnson v. Barnhart,*No. CA-03-60-2-BO (E.D.N.C. Oct. 6, 2004). 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.

*AFFIRMED*
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Anthony Greicius","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/anthony-greicius-116962jpl-nasa-gov\/","title":"NASA Mission Excels at Spotting Greenhouse Gas Emission Sources","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"IBk7CW71uV\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/emit\/nasa-mission-excels-at-spotting-greenhouse-gas-emission-sources\/\">NASA Mission Excels at Spotting Greenhouse Gas Emission Sources<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/emit\/nasa-mission-excels-at-spotting-greenhouse-gas-emission-sources\/embed\/#?secret=IBk7CW71uV\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Mission Excels at Spotting Greenhouse Gas Emission Sources” — NASA\" data-secret=\"IBk7CW71uV\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/1-emit-methane-flare-adobe.jpeg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":450}
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Geoffrey M.T. Sturr, Bar No. 014063

Hayleigh S. Crawford, Bar No. 032326

Osborn Maledon, P.A.

2929 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2100

Phoenix, AZ 85012-2793

gsturr@omlaw.com

hcrawford@omlaw.com

(602) 640-9000

Michael D. Allweiss (admitted pro hac vice)

Allweiss & Allweiss

913 31st Terrace NE

St. Petersburg, FL 33704 

mallweiss@aol.com

(727) 827-4944

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

CMS Mechanical Services, LLC, a 

Florida limited liability company,

Plaintiff,

vs.

PetSmart, Inc., a Delaware corporation,

Defendant.

No. CV-15-02040-PHX-NVW

NOTICE OF VIDEOTAPED 

DEPOSITION OF RYAN MATZ

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff CMS Mechanical Services, LLC, will 

depose, upon oral examination and pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 

30, the person named below at the designated time and place, continuing from day to 

day until completed:

Deponent: Ryan Matz

Place: Osborn Maledon, P.A.

2929 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2100

Phoenix, Arizona 85012

Date and Time: Friday, September 30, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.

Case 2:15-cv-02040-NVW Document 56 Filed 09/16/16 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

The testimony given shall be recorded by stenographic and audiovisual means, 

pursuant to the recording protocols set forth in Rule 30(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure.

DATED this 16th day of September, 2016.

OSBORN MALEDON, P.A.

By: /s/ Hayleigh S. Crawford

Geoffrey M.T. Sturr

Hayleigh S. Crawford

2929 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2100

Phoenix, AZ 85012-2793

Michael D. Allweiss

Allweiss & Allweiss

913 31st Terrace, NE

St. Petersburg, FL 33704

Attorneys for Plaintiff

CMS Mechanical Services, LLC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September 16, 2016, the attached document was 

electronically transmitted to the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System which 

will send notification of such filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to 

all CM/ECF registrants.

 /s/ Rebecca Warinner

6815806

2

Case 2:15-cv-02040-NVW Document 56 Filed 09/16/16 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32.

                Certifications Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350

         The  undersigned,  who is the  chief  executive  officer  and the chief
financial officer of Community First  Bancorporation,  hereby certifies that, to
the best of his  knowledge,  the  accompanying  Form  10-Q of the  issuer  fully
complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) 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 issuer.

May 13, 2008

                            s/ Frederick D. Shepherd, Jr.
                            ----------------------------------------------------
                            Frederick D. Shepherd, Jr.
                            Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We  consent  to  the   incorporation   by  reference  in  the  previously  filed
Registration  Statement  No.  333-125284  of Enova  Systems,  Inc.  on Form S-8;
Registration  No.  333-95701  on  Form  S-8/S-3;   Registration  Statement  Nos.
333-85308  and  333-96829  on  Forms  S-1/A;  and  Registration   Statement  No.
333-117321 on Form S-1 of our report,  dated March 10, 2005,  which  includes an
emphasis  paragraph  relating  to the  Company's  ability to continue as a going
concern,  appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Enova Systems,  Inc.
for the year ended December 31, 2004.

We also consent to the  reference to our Firm under the captions  "Experts"  and
"Selected Financial Data" in the Prospectus.



SINGER LEWAK GREENBAUM & GOLDSTEIN LLP

Los Angeles, California
September 15, 2005