alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
40 Occupational Outlook Quarterly • Fall 2013

Employment and wages for newly defined occupations

National employment and wages for the 15 largest occupations identified as new in the 

2010 Standard Occupational Classification system, May 2012

Note: Annual wages have been calculated by multiplying the hourly mean wage by a “year-round, full-time” hours figure of 2,080 hours; for those 

occupations where there is not an hourly mean wage published, the annual wage has been directly calculated from the reported survey data.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics.

Occupations related to healthcare dominate the list of 

occupations that are new to the 2010 Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system. But computer occupations led in employment in May 2012, according to data 

available for the first time from the U.S. Bureau of Labor 

Statistics (BLS).

As the chart shows, in May 2012, computer network 

support specialists was the largest of the newly defined 

SOC occupations. The four computer-related occupations—computer network support specialists, computer 

network architects, Web developers, and information 

security analysts—had total employment of 481,480. 

These four were also among the highest paying of the new 

SOC occupations in May 2012.

Five of the occupations in the chart are related to 

healthcare: nurse practitioners, phlebotomists, orderlies, 

nurse anesthetists, and magnetic resonance imaging technologists. Another 5 healthcare-related occupations are 

among the remaining 9 new SOC occupations not shown 

below. Employment in the 10 new healthcare-related 

occupations totaled 371,500 in May 2012. In addition, 

nurse anesthetists led all new SOC occupations with mean 

wages of $154,390.

These data are from the BLS Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) program and include wage and salary workers only. The May 2012 estimates mark the first 

time that OES data are based on the 2010 SOC system, 

which includes 24 newly defined occupations. Occupation 

profiles are available on the BLS website at www.bls.gov/

oes/current/oes_stru.htm.

Annual 

mean wage Employment

$62,960

94,000

91,450

66,100

30,910

89,290

25,700

55,220

37,130

39,580

56,160

37,490

24,880

154,390

65,410

Computer network support specialists

Computer network architects

Nurse practitioners

Web developers

Phlebotomists

Information security analysts

Orderlies

Fundraisers

Transportation security screeners

Financial clerks, all other

Special education teachers, all other

Community health workers

Food processing workers, all other

Nurse anesthetists

Magnetic resonance imaging 

technologists

167,980

137,890

105,780

102,940

100,380

72,670

53,920

48,530

47,200

39,290

39,260

38,020

37,570

34,180

29,560
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NV/Research

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MATEO ARIKOLI MAINAKAVIKA

VOLAVOLA; et al.,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-72731

Agency Nos. A075-723-402

 A078-112-136

 A078-112-137

 A078-112-138

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 16, 2010** 

Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges

Mateo Arikoli Mainakavika Volavola, his wife, and children petition for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying Volavola’s

motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. §

FILED

FEB 25 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
NV/Research 2 07-72731

1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, see

Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for

review.

We reject Volavola’s contention that the BIA erred by failing to

acknowledge or weigh evidence submitted with the motion to reopen. See

Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 603 (9th Cir. 2006).

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Volavola’s motion to reopen

based on changed circumstances because he failed to establish the 2006 coup in

Fiji resulted in material changes that warrant reopening or that he is now prima

facie eligible for asylum. See Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir. 2004)

(“The critical question is. . . whether circumstances have changed sufficiently so

that a petitioner who previously did not have a legitimate claim for asylum now has

a well-founded fear of future persecution.”). 

We decline to consider Volavola’s challenge to the BIA’s April 20, 2005

order denying asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the

Convention Against Torture because the contentions have already been considered

and rejected by this court. Volavola v. Gonzales, 225 Fed.Appx. 559 (9th Cir.

2007); see also Merritt v. Mackey, 932 F.2d 1317, 1320 (9th Cir. 1991) (explaining

that under the ‘law of the case doctrine,’ one panel of an appellate court will not
NV/Research 3 07-72731

reconsider questions which another panel has decided on a prior appeal in the same

case).

Finally, because the BIA correctly found in its April 20, 2005 order that

Volavola had not demonstrated past persecution, the BIA did not err by not

addressing Volavola’s humanitarian asylum claim in the motion to reopen. 

8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1)(iii); see also Hanna v. Keisler, 506 F.3d 933, 939 (9th

Cir. 2007).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
J-S32023-23

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

KEVON IMMANUEL PURIFORY 

Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

 PENNSYLVANIA

 No. 140 MDA 2023

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered January 9, 2023

In the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County Criminal Division at 

No(s): CP-22-CR-0000321-2021

BEFORE: DUBOW, J., KUNSELMAN, J., and NICHOLS, J.

JUDGMENT ORDER BY KUNSELMAN, J.: FILED: OCTOBER 12, 2023

Kevon Immanuel Purifory appeals from the judgment of sentence 

entered after the trial court found him guilty of recklessly endangering another 

person and not guilty of attempted murder and aggravated assault. The

parties and the trial court agree that Purifory’s valid self-defense claim 

negates the recklessness required to sustain his conviction. After review, we 

reverse.

A “defender may not be simultaneously found to have justifiably acted 

in self-defense and be criminally liable for crimes involving recklessness or 

malice.” Commonwealth v. Fowlin, 710 A.2d 1130, 1132 (Pa. 1998) (citing 

Commonwealth v. Hilbert, 382 A.2d 724 (Pa. 1978), and Commonwealth 

v. Heatherington, 385 A.2d 338 (Pa. 1978)). This includes crimes of 

recklessness against bystanders. Id. at 1134.
J-S32023-23

- 2 -

Here, the trial court, as finder of fact, found that Purifory shot the 

complainant in self-defense. This precludes a finding that Purifory acted 

recklessly, towards both the complainant and other people in the apartment

complex. Id. Accordingly, we reverse.

Judgment of sentence vacated. Conviction reversed. Appellant Kevon 

Immanuel Purifory discharged. Jurisdiction relinquished.

Date: 10/12/2023
Case 3:11-cv-00247-MLC-LHG Document 206-10 Filed 08/22/14 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 3186
Case 2:10-cv-06269-SRC -MAS Document 9 Filed 01/13/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 155
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



The undersigned, Cleveland Gary, the Chief Executive
and Chief Financial Officer of Ecrid, Inc. (the “Company”), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:



1.      
The Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2022 (the “Report”), fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 operation of the
Company.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned
has executed this statement this 12th day of August 2022.



| | /s/ Cleveland Gary                                                                                                                              
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Cleveland Gary 
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial 
and Accounting Officer)



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



The foregoing certification is being furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section 18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether
made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
#### Frame *v.*Sewing-Machine Co.1

*(Circuit Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.*

June 28, 1887.)

Malicious Prosecution—Injunction—Evidence.

In an action brought to recover damages for maliciously procuring an injunction, the plaintiff must prove malice and want of probable cause.

At Law. On motion to take off nonsuit.

This was an action brought to recover damages for the alleged malicious procuration of an injunction. Previously to the granting of the injunction in question, which was subsequently dissolved, similar ones had been granted in several other circuits. The plaintiff failed to show malice, and in the light of the action of the 'other circuit courts, the court did not- consider the defendant’s application without probable cause, and entered a nonsuit. A motion was subsequently made to take off the nonsuit, wdiich the court refused. ■

*Joseph 0. Fraley,*for plaintiff.

*Wayne MacVeagh,*for defendant.

Reported by C. Berkeley Taylor, Esq., of the Philadelphia bar.

Butler, J.

The motion must be denied. On fuller examination, I am entirely satisfied the plaintiff has not presented a case which entitles him to recover. The burden is on him to prove malice,,and also *want of*
      *705
      *probable canse.*In my judgment, he has not produced 'any reliable evidence of either. I have looked carefully through the case, and the impression made at the trial has deepened into conviction. I need not repeat what I then suggested in explanation of my views.
July 20, 2015

KURT B. WENTZ ^DIN . _ 1ST COURT OF APPEALS

Attorney at Law Houston, texas

5629 Cypress Creek Parkway Suite 115

Houston, Texas 77069 JUL 2 2 2015

(281)587-0088 Christopher Ai prine

CLERK. VJF

Mr. Christopher Prine, Clerk

1st Court of Appeals

301 Fannin

Houston, TX 77002

Re: Appellate Court No. 01-13-01004-CR

Trial Court No. 1363644

Style: Brian Victorian v. The State of Texas

Dear Mr. Prine:

In compliance with Tex. R. App. P. 48.4 enclosed please find a copy ofmy letter to Mr.

Victorian with Return Receipt attached advising him ofthe Court's opinion in his case,

my decision not to file a petition for discretionary review on his behalf and advising him

of his right to file such a pleading on his own behalf.

Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Very truly yours,

KurtB. Wentz

Enclosure: Letter to Mr. Victorian with CMRRR
BEAUMONT TX 77705

0051

TO.oir

hi/A • _

ISTOf 07/08/2015

ISOL"TM !_:..'_

/?r< •*.Y?.^i?»^P^J„A¥**_7.37...

j. n w - i u y o* / _/ /

RTB.WENTZ

Attorney at Law

5S Creek Parkway Sui

uston, Texas 77069

(281) 587-0088

s<

Stiles Unit

3060 FM 3514

Beaumont, TX 77705

Dear Mr. Victorian: !

Itsaddens me to report that the 1st Court of Appeals has affirri

With the Court's decision my representation of you on direct \

I have reviewed your case and the Court's opinion for the pur]

discretionary review. However, after having done so I have d

petition for discretionary review on your behalf. However, yo.

for discretionary review on your ownbehalf. Such a pleading isreferred to as aprose petition

for discretionarv review.

•fcf *-

Nl

o £ o

'pS«* <D S

|esir

O

5

^ "5

O £ ** *" „:

£££ (0

|'t-••gsiaS $ CO

Hit) 0) , ES E

£SS

i3s.t

ssg

© o> •*=

Sen

13 js"*"

*• 3 o

oS>-

w < O

s

* Vi

c« 5

B s &

i2 .S-l

=a § D CC o

.•6" £' t> o 3 S -coo

a. ir o

• ••

<D «=

|2" I— j.2 -8..

8> 2

_ "D

5 S

5 ~

£ O If <D

03S^DD

s

-4

N

^>

*t

? V3

^ p ^ v ^ Ul\_ iltUL L\j i.:v u.

I am enclosing a copy of the Court's opinion to assist you in deciding whether or not to file such

apro se PDR. I am also enclosing a copy of Tex. R. App. P. 68 that relates to the filing of a

petition for discretionary review. Please note that the time limits for filing such a pleading are

strictly construed.

Should you wish to contactthe 1st Court of Appeals withregards to obtaining further information

on the case theirmailing address is Clerk. lbt Court of Appeals. 301 Fannin. Houston. Texas

77002. Your letter should be addressed to Mr. Christopher Prine, Clerk.

I am also enclosing a copy ofthe brief that was filed on your behalf. A copy ofthe brief was

originally sent to you On December 17, 2014 as evidenced by the enclosed letter. However, I am

not sure whether you retained the brief or not.

You have my best wishes for the future.

Sincerely,

Kurt B. Wefitz

Enclosure: Opinion. Brief. Letter

to

D

•

ru

ru

in

tO

r^

_D

m

Q

•

a

ru

•

n03 ~

.Q C

M

I

I t
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 4.1
                                                                     -----------


NUMBER                                                                   SHARES
 C-0         Incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware
-----                                                                     ----



                               WENTWORTH II, INC.

                    Total Authorized Issue 50,000,000 Shares

40,000,000 Share $.01 Par Value                10,000,000 Shares $.01 Par Value
       Common Stock                                     Preferred Stock

                                                             See Reverse for
                                                             Certain Definitions


This is to certify that             SPECIMEN              is the owner of
                        ---------------------------------
_______________________________________________________________________________
             Fully Paid and Non-Assessable Shares of Common Stock of
                               Wentworth II, Inc.


transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder thereof in
person or by a duly authorized Attorney upon surrender of this Certificate
properly endorsed.

Witness, the seal of the Corporation and the signatures of its duly authorized
officers.

Dated


_______________________________                 _______________________________
                      Secretary                                       President
### Bureau of Labor Statistics U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Data on displayEducation pays, 2023 April 2024  If you’re wondering whether it pays to stay in school, take a look at data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS): As workers’ educational attainment rises, their unemployment rates decrease and earnings increase. As the charts show, workers age 25 and over who have less education than a high school diploma had the highest unemployment rate (5.6 percent) and lowest median weekly earnings ($708) in 2023 among those at all education levels. Workers with graduate degrees had the lowest unemployment rates and highest earnings. View Chart Data
 Earnings and unemployment rates by educational attainment, 2023
Educational attainment
Median usual weekly earnings
Unemployment rateDoctoral degree
$2,109
1.6%Professional degree
2,206
1.2Master's degree
1,737
2.0Bachelor's degree
1,493
2.2Associate's degree
1,058
2.7Some college, no degree
992
3.3High school diploma
899
3.9Less than a high school diploma
708
5.6Note: Data are for persons age 25 and over. Earnings are for full-time wage and salary workers.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey.
 These data come from the BLS Current Population Survey (CPS), a monthly survey that collects information about the labor force, including age, sex, and other characteristics. Earnings data are for full-time wage and salary workers. Each level of education you complete may help you develop more skills, give you access to higher paying occupations, and signal that you’re able to follow through on important tasks, such as planning ahead and meeting deadlines, that employers value. Other factors affecting employment and earnings include geographic location, experience, and hours worked. BLS data and information can help you understand some of these factors. For example, the Occupational Outlook Handbook (OOH) provides information on wages, typical education requirements, and the projected job outlook for hundreds of occupations. **** Suggested citation: "Education pays, 2023," 
						*Career Outlook,* 
						U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 
						April 2024.
 Related Content Education level and projected openings, 2022–32
Educational attainment for workers 25 years and older by detailed occupation
Median weekly earnings of full‐time wage and salary workers by detailed occupation and sex
Unemployed persons by occupation and sex
Field of degree
 Related Subjects Associate’s degree
						   																Career planning
						   																Certificate
						   																Charts
						   																College
						   																Education level
						   																GED
						   																Graduate degree
						   																High school
						   																Pay
						   																Unemployment


**U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics**
Office of Occupational Statistics and Employment Projections 
PSB Suite 2135 
2 Massachusetts Avenue NE  
Washington, DC 20212-0001 Telephone:1-202-691-5700

www.bls.gov/careeroutlook
Contact Career Outlook
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 14 (Friday, January 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 4199]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1557]


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

FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT INVESTMENT BOARD


Employee Thrift Advisory Council

Time and Date: 10 a.m. (EST) February 4, 2009.

Place: 4th Floor, Conference Room, 1250 H Street, NW., Washington, DC.

Status: Open.

Matters To Be Considered: 
    1. Approval of the minutes of the June 30, 2008 ETAC meeting.
    2. Thrift Savings Plan activity report by the Executive Director.
    3. Potential Legislative items:
     a. Automatic enrollment.
     b. L Fund default.
     c. Roth feature.
     d. Mutual fund window.
     e. Immediate employer contributions.
     f. Surviving spouse accounts.
     g. Administrative subpoena authority.
    4. RMD suspension for 2009.
    5. 2008 TSP Participant Survey results.
    6. Agency review of the latest REIT industry proposal.
    7. L Fund allocations.
    8. New Business.

Contact Person for More Information: Thomas K. Emswiler, Committee 
Management Officer, (202) 942-1660.

    Dated: January 16, 2009.
Thomas K. Emswiler,
General Counsel, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.
 [FR Doc. E9-1557 Filed 1-21-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6760-01-P
# table75_q9.4_size
EXHIBIT 32.1

Section 1350 Certifications

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Dollarama Group L.P. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending
July 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), we, Larry Rossy and Robert Coallier, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of the general partner of the Company,
Dollarama Group GP Inc., certify that to our knowledge:

1. the Report complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange of 1934, as amended; 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: September 14, 2006



/s/ LARRY ROSSYLarry RossyChief Executive Officer/s/ ROBERT COALLIERRobert CoallierChief Financial Officer
<PAGE>

                                                                EXHIBIT 10.14(d)

                                 AMENDMENT NO. 3
                                     TO THE
                        SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT PLAN FOR
                 ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES OF AECO PRODUCTS DIVISION OF
                        NATIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC.


         THIS AMENDMENT made as of the 31st day of August, 2001, by National
Service Industries, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("NSI");

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

         WHEREAS, NSI has previously established the Supplemental Retirement
Plan for Eligible Employees of AECO Products Division of National Service
Industries, Inc. (the "Plan") for the exclusive benefit of its eligible
employees and their beneficiaries; and

         WHEREAS, effective as of August 31, 2001, NSI will restructure its
business operations and form several new subsidiary corporations; and

         WHEREAS, NSI desires to amend the Plan in connection with the
restructuring; and

         WHEREAS, pursuant to the power of amendment contained in Section 11.1
of the Plan, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

                                       1.

         Section 1.1(m) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting such section
in its entirety and substituting the following:

         "1.1(m) Company: Company shall mean the AECO Products Division of
         National Service Industries, Inc. (CA), formerly known as NSI
         Enterprises, Inc."

                                       2.

         This Amendment shall be effective August 31, 2001.

                                       3.

         Except as provided herein, the provisions of the Plan shall remain in
full force and effect.


<PAGE>



         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, NSI has caused this Amendment No. 3 to be executed
by its duly authorized corporate officers as of the date and year first written
above.


ATTEST:                                     NATIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC.



By: /s/ Carol E. Morgan                     By: /s/ Kenyon W. Murphy
   ------------------------------              ---------------------------------
WINSTON E. COCHRAN, JR.

Attorney at Law

P.O. Box 2945 Tel. (713) 228-0264

League City, TX 77574

July 24, 2015

Christopher A. Prine

Clerk of the Court

Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas

301 Fannin, Room 208

Houston, TX 77002-2066

Re: Venzant v. State, No. 01-15-00297-CR

Dear Mr. Prine:

It has come to my attention that I am still listed as appellate counsel in Number

01-15-00297-CR, an appeal by Prentis Ray Venzant. I represented Mr. Venzant at his

trial in the 212th District Court of Galveston County, but the district court appointed

attorney Tad Nelson to represent Mr. Venzant on appeal. Accordingly, I have no

authority to file a brief on behalf of M r. Venzant. Please direct all notices to Mr.

Nelson. 

Thank you for your assistance in this matter. 

Sincerely,

______________________________

Winston E. Cochran, Jr.

Attorney at Law

Texas Bar No. 04457300

cc: Galveston County District Attorney

ACCEPTED

01-15-00297-CR

FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

7/24/2015 4:26:56 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 7/24/2015 4:26:56 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk