alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### PACIFIC INTERMOUNTAIN EXPRESS CO. v. UNION PAC. R. CO. DALTON et al. v. UNION PAC. R. CO.

United States District Court W. D. Missouri, W. D.

Jan. 24, 1950.

George L. Gisler of Reeder, Gisler *&*Griffin, Kansas City, Mo., for plaintiffs.

*62James C. Wilson of Watson, Ess, Whit-taker, Marshall and Enggas, Kansas City, Mo., for defendant.

REEVES, Chief Judge.

The plaintiff has moved for a consolidation of the above causes. The case numbered 5999 is, as its title implies, an action for the death of the driver of a motor truck owned by the plaintiff in cause numbered 5181.

The plaintiff in said cause No. 5181 has sued for damages arising from the identical collision which it is claimed in case numbered 5999 caused the death of the decedent. It is obvious, therefore, that a common question of law and of fact is involved.

The defendant objects on the sole ground that one action is for death and the other for damages to property, and, moreover, that the defendant in cause No. 5181 has interposed a counterclaim upon the ground that the deceased driver was negligent in the operation of his truck.

These several contentions show that the cases should be consolidated as the identical evidence would be used in each case.

When the question of liability has been determined by a jury it would not be confused by the .respective contentions of the parties on the measure of damages, though life as well as property is involved. Under Rule 42(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., the cases should be consolidated, and such an order will be made.

Interrogatories are authorized by Rule 33, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The interrogatories propounded by defendant are 13 in number and seek information relating to the position of the train and the motor vehicle operated by the decedent driver approximately at the time the collision occurred. In the objections to the interrogatories the plaintiff shows that the •driver- of the motor vehicle was killed or ■died shortly after the collision and that, therefore, no information concerning the relative positions of the train and the motor vehicle -could be given save solely on hearsay. Moreover, it is contended that agents and employees of the defendant were present and that they are entirely familiar with the relative positions of the two moving instrumentalities..

Interrogatories 12 and 13 seek the names of witnesses to the accident or collision and whose names are known to the plaintiff. Under the law the defendant is entitled to this information. Rule 26(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Accordingly, it will be ordered that the plaintiff Pacific Intermountain Express Company supply the names of witnesses as requested by the defendant. The objections of plaintiff to the first 11 interrogatories will be sustained.
#### Young Hwan Park, Respondent, v Martin Orellana, Appellant.

[854 NYS2d 447]

*722The defendant made a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident, by submitting the affirmed medical report of his examining physician and copies of the plaintiffs deposition testimony *(see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345, 350-351 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]; *Moore v Edison,*25 AD3d 672 [2006]).

In opposition, the evidence submitted by the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether he sustained a serious injury in the nature of a significant and/or a permanent consequential limitation of use to his cervical spine or left shoulder as a result of the subject accident. While the plaintiff’s treating chiropractor opined in his affidavit that the plaintiff sustained permanent injuries and limitations to, among other things, his cervical spine as a result of the subject accident, this opinion was not based on a recent examination of the plaintiff *(see Amato v Fast Repair Inc.,*42 AD3d 477, 478 [2007]; *Ali v Mirshah,*41 AD3d 748, 749 [2007]; *Elgendy v Nieradko,*307 AD2d 251 [2003]).

Additionally, although we note that the defendant failed to raise in the Supreme Court his argument that the affirmation of the plaintiff’s physician in Maryland did not constitute competent evidence because she was not “authorized by law to practice in the state” (CPLR 2106; *see Moore v Edison,*25 AD3d 672 [2006]; *Palo v Latt,*270 AD2d 323 [2000]), even if we were to consider that affirmation, it did not raise a triable issue of fact, because the plaintiff’s Maryland physician failed to set forth the objective tests she relied upon in arriving at her conclusions *(see Murray v Hartford,*23 AD3d 629 [2005]; *Nozine v Sav-On Car Rentals,*15 AD3d 555, 556 [2005]; *Bailey v Ichtchenko,*11 AD3d 419, 420 [2004]). Spolzino, J.P., Santucci, Dillon and Balkin, JJ., concur.
COZEN O’CONNOR 

BY: Melanie A. Miller (MM 2992) 

144-B West State Street 

Trenton, New Jersey 08608 

(609) 989-8620 Telephone 

(856) 910-5075 Facsimile 

457 Haddonfield Road, Suite 300 

Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 

(856) 910-5000 - Telephone 

(856) 910-5075 – Facsimile 

mmiller@cozen.com – E-Mail 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Celgene Corporation and 

Anthrogenesis Corporation 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

__________________________________________ 

 : 

Celgene Corporation and : 

Anthrogenesis Corporation t/a LifebankUSA, : 

 : 

 Plaintiffs, : 

 : Civil Action Number: 

: 2:11-CV-02409-FSH-PS 

 v. : 

 : 

Americord Registry LLC and : 

Martin Smithmyer, individually, : 

 : 

 Defendants. : 

__________________________________________

NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF 

CIVIL PROCEDURE 41(A) OF DEFENDANTS AMERICORD REGISTRY LLC 

AND MARTIN SMITHMYER 

Plaintiffs, Celgene Corporation and Anthrogenesis Corporation, filed their 

Complaint in this litigation on April 27, 2011. Defendants were formally served with the 

Complaint on May 6, 2011. Defendants have not filed a response to the Complaint. 

The parties have resolved their differences relating to this litigation. 

Case 2:11-cv-02409-FSH-PS Document 12 Filed 07/29/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 66
-2-

 THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by plaintiff, through its designated 

counsel, that this matter may be dismissed in its entirety pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 41(a). 

 A Proposed Order is attached for the Court’s convenience. 

Dated: July 29, 2011 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Melanie A. Miller

COZEN O’CONNOR 

BY: Melanie A. Miller (MM 2992) 

144-B West State Street 

Trenton, New Jersey 08608 

(609) 989-8620 Telephone 

(856) 910-5075 Facsimile 

457 Haddonfield Road, Suite 300 

Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 

(856) 910-5000 - Telephone 

(856) 910-5075 – Facsimile 

mmiller@cozen.com – E-Mail 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Celgene Corporation and 

Anthrogenesis Corporation 

Case 2:11-cv-02409-FSH-PS Document 12 Filed 07/29/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 67
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the 

forgoing was filed electronically through this Court’s ECF System and is available for 

viewing and downloading from this Court’s ECF System. I further certify that an 

electronic copy of the foregoing was served upon all counsel of record through this 

Court’s ECF System at the e-mail address listed in the Court’s database as follows: 

SETH R. GOLDMAN 

srgoldman@mintz.com; docketing@mintz.com 

I further certify that a copy of the foregoing was served upon counsel for 

Defendants via First Class Mail, postage pre-paid at the following address: 

Dominic Picca 

Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.

666 Third Avenue 

New York, NY 10017 

/s/ Melanie A. Miller

Dated: July 29, 2011 Melanie A. Miller

Case 2:11-cv-02409-FSH-PS Document 12 Filed 07/29/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 68
# table162_q16.3_size
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

 MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

OFFICE: TRENTON

JUDGE JOEL A. PISANO

COURT REPORTER: J. CARUSO

DATE OF PROCEEDING: 02/23/2012

TITLE OF CASE:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs.

CRIMINAL DOCKET #: 11-482(JAP)-01

ERIC LOGIUDICE, DEFENDANT PRESENT.

APPEARANCES:

David Malagold, Assistant United States Attorney

Timothy Donohue, Esquire for Defendant

Stacy Biancamano, Esquire for Defendant

David Haneke, U.S. Probation Officer

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS:

DEFENDANT SENTENCED TO A TWO-COUNT INFORMATION.

SENTENCE: 18 months of imprisonment imposed on each count, to be served

concurrently, along with certain recommendations to the Bureau of

Prisons.

Ordered defendant to voluntarily surrender to the institution or U.S.

Marshal’s Service on 5/17/2012.

SUPERVISED RELEASE: 3 years on each count to run concurrently with

special conditions.

PROBATION: N/A

FINE: Waived.

RESTITUTION: $402,719.50

SPECIAL ASSESSMENT: $100.00 per count; total: $200.00 (due immediately).

Defendant advised of his rights to appeal.

Ordered bail continued.

TIME COMMENCED: 11:00 a.m.

TIME ADJOURNED: 12:30 p.m.

TOTAL TIME: 1 hour & 30 minutes

s/Dana Sledge

Courtroom Deputy

 

 

 

Case 3:11-cr-00482-JAP Document 8 Filed 02/23/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 34
**Exhibit 32.2**
**Section 1350 Certification of Chief Financial Officer**
The undersigned hereby certifies, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in hiscapacity as an officer of First Shares Bancorp, Inc. (“First Shares”), that, toher knowledge:
(1) the Annual Report of First Shares on Form 10-KSB for the period endedDecember 31, 2003, 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 such report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of FirstShares.
Dated: March 30, 2004                    /s/ Kimberly B. Kling   Kimberly B. Kling   Chief Financial Officer
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 1 of 13 PageID: 1
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 2 of 13 PageID: 2
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 3 of 13 PageID: 3
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 4 of 13 PageID: 4
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 5 of 13 PageID: 5
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 6 of 13 PageID: 6
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 7 of 13 PageID: 7
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 8 of 13 PageID: 8
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 9 of 13 PageID: 9
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 10 of 13 PageID: 10
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 11 of 13 PageID: 11
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 12 of 13 PageID: 12
Case 2:11-cv-03770-WJM-MF Document 1 Filed 06/30/11 Page 13 of 13 PageID: 13
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

      In connection  with the Annual report of Quintek  Technologies,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Robert
Steele, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects,  the financial condition and result of operations
            of the Company.

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

Date:  September 28, 2006                              By: /s/ ROBERT STEELE
                                                           -------------------
                                                       Robert Steele
                                                       Chief Executive Officer
Case 3:11-mj-02507-DEA   Document 8   Filed 04/01/11   Page 1 of 3 PageID: 10

Case 3:11-mj-02507-DEA   Document 8   Filed 04/01/11   Page 2 of 3 PageID: 11

Case 3:11-mj-02507-DEA   Document 8   Filed 04/01/11   Page 3 of 3 PageID: 12
64

Table 22. Work experience of the population by sex and full- and part-time status, selected years, 1970-2005

(Percent distribution)

Year

Total

Total, both sexes 

1970...................... 138,953 93,850 67.5 100.0 79.4 55.6 23.8 20.6 6.7 13.9 

1975...................... 153,180 102,603 67.0 100.0 78.9 54.3 24.6 21.2 7.5 13.7 

1980...................... 169,452 115,752 68.3 100.0 78.5 56.1 22.4 21.4 7.7 13.7 

1985...................... 179,944 123,466 68.6 100.0 78.2 58.7 19.5 21.9 8.3 13.6 

1990...................... 189,238 132,562 70.1 100.0 78.8 60.4 18.4 21.3 8.7 12.6 

1995...................... 199,925 138,971 69.5 100.0 78.6 62.9 15.7 21.3 9.1 12.2 

2000 1

..................... 214,292 150,787 70.4 100.0 80.4 66.7 13.7 19.5 9.3 10.2 

2005........................227,975 154,322 67.7 100.0 80.3 67.5 12.8 19.7 10.0 9.7 

Women

1970...................... 73,657 38,809 52.7 100.0 67.9 40.7 27.2 32.2 10.1 22.1 

1975...................... 80,834 43,511 53.8 100.0 67.1 41.4 25.7 32.8 11.7 21.1 

1980...................... 89,259 51,492 57.7 100.0 67.7 44.7 23.0 32.3 11.9 20.4 

1985...................... 94,490 56,165 59.4 100.0 68.1 48.9 19.2 31.8 12.3 19.5 

1990...................... 98,970 61,494 62.1 100.0 69.8 51.5 18.3 30.2 12.8 17.4 

1995...................... 104,058 65,304 62.8 100.0 70.2 54.3 15.9 29.7 13.3 16.4 

2000 1

..................... 111,440 71,341 64.0 100.0 72.9 58.4 14.5 27.1 13.4 13.7 

2005........................117,814 72,309 61.4 100.0 72.7 59.9 12.8 27.3 14.1 13.2 

Men

1970...................... 65,296 55,041 84.3 100.0 87.6 66.1 21.5 12.4 4.4 8.0 

1975...................... 72,346 59,091 81.7 100.0 87.5 63.8 23.7 12.5 4.4 8.1 

1980...................... 80,193 64,260 80.1 100.0 87.2 65.2 22.0 12.8 4.4 8.4 

1985...................... 85,454 67,301 78.8 100.0 86.5 66.8 19.7 13.5 4.8 8.7 

1990...................... 90,269 71,068 78.7 100.0 86.4 68.0 18.4 13.5 5.1 8.4 

1995...................... 95,867 73,667 76.8 100.0 86.2 70.6 15.6 13.9 5.5 8.4 

2000 1

..................... 102,853 79,446 77.2 100.0 87.5 74.2 13.3 12.6 5.5 7.1 

2005........................110,161 82,013 74.4 100.0 87.0 74.2 12.8 13.0 6.3 6.7 

50 to 52

weeks

1 to 49

weeks Total 50 to 52weeks

1 to 49

weeks

Population

(in

thousands)

With work experience With work experience

Total

(in

thousands)

Percent of 

population

Usually work full time Usually work part time

Total

1 The comparability of historical labor force data has been

affected at various times by methodological and conceptual

changes in the Current Population Survey (CPS). For an

explanation, see the Explanatory Notes and Estimates of

Error section of Employment and Earnings, a monthly BLS

periodical.

NOTE: See Technical Note for an explanation of the

work experience concept.

SOURCE: Annual Social and Economic Supplements,

1971-2006, Current Population Survey, U.S. Department

of Labor, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

64
Case 3:11-mj-05017-TJB   Document 136   Filed 05/12/11   Page 1 of 1 PageID: 235
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-2298

GILVIE E. HUFFMAN,

Petitioner,

versus

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION

PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.

(92-2117-BLA)

Submitted: July 31, 1997 Decided: August 28, 1997

Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gilvie E. Huffman, Petitioner Pro Se. Christian P. Barber, Jill M.

Otte, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for

Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* We adopt the reasoning of the Board insofar as it finds that

Petitioner is not entitled to benefits on the merits of his claim.

2

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner seeks review of the Benefits Review Board's decision and order affirming the administrative law judge's denial of

black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C.A. §§ 901-945 (West 1986

& Supp. 1996). Our review of the record discloses that the Board's

decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board.*

Huffman v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, No.

92-2117-BLA (B.R.B. Aug. 9, 1996). 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
HOUSEHOLD DATA

ANNUAL AVERAGES

35. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex

[In thousands]

Category

Total Age Sex

2011 2012

16 to 24

years

25 to 54

years

55 years

and over Men Women

2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012

Total not in the labor force. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86,001 88,310 17,201 17,499 22,961 23,061 45,839 47,750 34,343 35,017 51,658 53,293

Do not want a job now1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79,564 81,752 15,177 15,383 20,107 20,248 44,280 46,120 31,298 31,989 48,266 49,763

Want a job1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,437 6,558 2,023 2,115 2,854 2,813 1,560 1,630 3,045 3,028 3,392 3,530

Did not search for work in previous

year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,268 3,390 1,010 1,064 1,303 1,328 955 998 1,463 1,490 1,804 1,900

Searched for work in previous year,

but not in past 4 weeks2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,169 3,168 1,014 1,052 1,551 1,484 605 632 1,582 1,537 1,587 1,630

Not available to work now. . . . . . . . . . . . . 597 651 262 282 262 288 73 82 236 253 361 399

Marginally attached (available to work

now)3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,573 2,516 752 770 1,289 1,196 532 550 1,346 1,285 1,227 1,232

Discouraged over job

prospects4

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 989 909 222 217 519 451 248 241 579 541 410 368

Reasons other than

discouragement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,584 1,608 530 553 770 746 284 309 767 743 817 864

Family responsibilities. . . . . . . . . . . . 215 229 30 33 139 147 45 49 48 61 166 168

In school or training. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 339 245 257 75 73 4 9 183 175 140 164

Ill health or disability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 168 18 18 93 83 58 66 86 80 83 87

Other5

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 871 238 245 463 442 177 185 449 427 428 444

1 Includes some persons who are not asked if they want a job.

2 Persons who had a job in the prior 12 months must have searched since the end of that job.

3 Persons ′′marginally attached to the labor force′′ are those who want a job, have searched for work during the prior 12 months, and were available to take a job during the

reference week, but had not looked for work in the past 4 weeks.

4 Discouraged workers are persons marginally attached to the labor force who did not actively look for work in the prior 4 weeks for reasons such as thinks no work available,

could not find work, lacks schooling or training, employer thinks too young or old, and other types of discrimination.

5 Includes those who did not actively look for work in the prior 4 weeks for such reasons as child-care and transportation problems, as well as a small number for which reason

for nonparticipation was not ascertained.

NOTE: Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

1
HOUSEHOLD DATA

ANNUAL AVERAGES

34. Unemployed jobseekers by sex, reason for unemployment, and active jobsearch methods used

[Numbers in thousands]

Sex and reason

2021

Unemployed Percent of jobseekers using method

Average

number of

methods

used

Total Jobseekers

Contacted

employer

directly

Sent out

resumes

or filled

out

applications

Placed

or

answered

ads

Contacted

friends

or

relatives

Public

employment

agency

Private

employment

agency

Other

Total unemployed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,623 7,041 50.3 53.3 14.0 24.8 12.9 7.3 14.5 1.8

Job losers and persons who completed

temporary jobs1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,099 3,516 51.4 53.4 15.7 28.4 15.2 8.5 14.7 1.9

Job leavers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803 803 52.8 56.0 13.8 20.9 10.3 6.5 12.3 1.7

Reentrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,204 2,204 48.1 52.1 12.1 21.1 11.0 6.5 15.7 1.7

New entrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 518 518 48.7 53.5 10.7 22.4 9.1 4.4 11.5 1.6

Men. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,676 3,807 51.5 50.7 13.7 26.2 13.2 7.7 14.5 1.8

Job losers and persons who completed

temporary jobs1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,901 2,033 51.9 50.3 14.8 29.1 15.1 8.8 14.9 1.9

Job leavers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407 407 54.9 55.1 14.3 22.8 9.6 5.6 11.7 1.7

Reentrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,079 1,079 49.7 49.3 11.7 23.0 12.0 7.2 15.8 1.7

New entrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 288 50.4 52.4 12.0 22.8 9.8 5.1 10.7 1.6

Women. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,948 3,233 49.0 56.4 14.3 23.2 12.5 6.9 14.5 1.8

Job losers and persons who completed

temporary jobs1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,198 1,484 50.7 57.8 16.8 27.5 15.3 8.1 14.3 1.9

Job leavers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 396 396 50.6 56.9 13.4 18.9 11.1 7.4 12.9 1.7

Reentrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,124 1,124 46.6 54.7 12.5 19.4 10.0 5.9 15.6 1.7

New entrants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 229 46.7 54.9 9.0 21.8 8.3 3.5 12.6 1.6

1 Data on the number of jobseekers and the jobsearch methods used exclude persons on temporary layoff.

NOTE: The jobseekers total is less than the total unemployed because it does not include persons on temporary layoff. The percent using each method will always total

more than 100 because many jobseekers use more than one method. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

1
Case 3:11-cv-02506-JAP-TJB Document 77 Filed 06/22/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 1430
Case 3:11-cv-02506-JAP-TJB Document 77 Filed 06/22/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 1431