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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
THERATECH, INC. CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE
SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                      18,163,154
<SECURITIES>                                 6,885,118
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,410,547
<ALLOWANCES>                                    91,034
<INVENTORY>                                  2,879,598
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            33,674,806
<PP&E>                                      26,144,006
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,088,166
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              56,378,794
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,558,092
<BONDS>                                      7,927,139
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       206,858
<OTHER-SE>                                  38,474,705
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                56,378,794
<SALES>                                      6,576,799
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            18,039,341
<CGS>                                        4,810,182
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,436,799
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                30,260
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             464,027
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,108,255
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,108,255
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,108,255
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.10
        

</TABLE>
No. 880.

#### Alker et al. *v.*Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

May 20, 1946.

Second petition for rehearing denied.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1341

EWART ULRIC VANDECRUIZE, Petitioner,

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 07-1849

EWART ULRIC VANDECRUIZE, Petitioner,

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 08-1303

EWART ULRIC VANDECRUIZE, Petitioner,

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent.On Petitions for Review of Orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Submitted: December 17, 2008 Decided: October 20, 2009

Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Nos. 07-1341 and 07-1849 petitions denied; No. 08-1303 petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rachel S. Ullman, YANG & ULLMAN, P.C., Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Gregory G. Katsas, Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wendtland, Assistant Director, Don G. Scroggin, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2PER CURIAM: In these consolidated petitions, Ewart Ulric Vandecruize, a native and citizen of Guyana, petitions for review of three separate orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”): (1) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s decision finding him inadmissible as an alien present in the United States without being admitted or paroled and as an alien who falsely represented himself to be a citizen of the United States for a purpose or benefit under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”), and finding him ineligible for adjustment of status; (2) denying his motion to reconsider; and (3) denying his motion for sua sponte

reconsideration.

Based on our review of the record and the Board’s order of April 9, 2007, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the finding that Vandecruize failed to meet his burden of proving that he was not inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(ii) (2006) as an alien who falsely represented himself to be a citizen of the United States for a purpose or

benefit under the INA. See 8 C.F.R. § 1240.8(b) (2009). We have also reviewed the Board’s order of July 31, 2007, and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying

Vandecruize’s motion to reconsider. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2009). Accordingly, we deny the petitions for review in Case

34 Nos. 07-1341 and 07-1849 for the reasons stated by the Board.

See In re: Vandecruize (B.I.A. Apr. 9 & Jul. 31, 2007). In Case No. 08-1303, Vandecruize challenges the Board’s denial of his motion for sua sponte reconsideration. Because we lack jurisdiction to review the Board’s refusal to exercise its sua sponte authority to reconsider, we dismiss the petition for review in No. 08-1303. See Mosere v. Mukasey , 552 F.3d 397, 400-01 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , __ S. Ct. __ (U.S. Oct. 5, 2009) (No. 08-10795). 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.

Nos. 07-1341 and 07-1849 PETITIONS DENIED No. 08-1303 PETITION DISMISSED
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7623
WINSTON MCCOY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN B. METZGER, III; JOSEPH F. LEWIS; SANDRA COMBS; WINNIE E. RICHARDSON-DIXON; LINDA R. PITMAN, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-246) Submitted: January 11, 1996 Decided: January 25, 1996 Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Winston McCoy, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Elizabeth Shea, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. McCoy v. Metzger , No. CA-95-246 (W.D. Va. Sept. 28, 1995).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
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 571 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 571

    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a shorter 
 recovery period for the depreciation of certain restaurant buildings.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 5, 2003

   Mr. Foley (for himself, Mr. McInnis, Mr. Herger, Mr. Gibbons, Mr. 
McHugh, Mr. Tiberi, Mr. Miller of Florida, Mr. Rogers of Kentucky, Mr. 
Crenshaw, Mr. Green of Wisconsin, Mr. Smith of Michigan, and Mr. Weldon 
 of Florida) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a shorter 
 recovery period for the depreciation of certain restaurant buildings.

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

SECTION 1. RECOVERY PERIOD FOR DEPRECIATION OF RESTAURANT BUILDINGS.

    (a) 15-Year Recovery Period.--Subparagraph (E) of section 168(e)(3) 
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 15-year property) is 
amended by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii), by striking the 
period at the end of clause (iii) and inserting ``, and'', and by 
adding at the end the following new clause:
                            ``(iv) any section 1250 property which is a 
                        retail restaurant facility.''
    (b) Retail Restaurant Facility.--Subsection (e) of section 168 of 
such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(6) Retail restaurant facility.--The term `retail 
        restaurant facility' means any building if more than 50 percent 
        of the building's square footage is devoted to preparation of, 
        and seating for on-premises consumption of, prepared meals.''
    (c) Alternative System.--The table contained in section 
168(g)(3)(B) of such Code is amended by inserting after the item 
relating to subparagraph (E)(iii) the following new item:

``(E)(iv)...................................................      20''.
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to retail restaurant buildings placed in service after the date 
of the enactment of this Act and to all improvements made after the 
date of enactment.
                                 <all>
```
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 546

To revise the boundary of the Kaloko-Honoko ̄hau National Historical Park 

in the State of Hawaii, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 5, 2003

Mr. CASE (for himself and Mr. ABERCROMBIE) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To revise the boundary of the Kaloko-Honoko ̄hau National 

Historical Park in the State of Hawaii, and for other 

purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Kaloko-Honoko ̄hau 

5 National Historical Park Addition Act of 2003’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ADDITIONS TO KALOKO–HONOKO ̄ HAU NATIONAL 

7 HISTORICAL PARK. 

8 Section 505(a) of Public Law 95–625 (16 U.S.C. 

9 396d(a)) is amended—
2

•HR 546 IH 

1 (1) by striking ‘‘(a) In order’’ and inserting 

2 ‘‘(a)(1) In order’’; 

3 (2) by striking ‘‘1978,’’ and all that follows and 

4 inserting ‘‘1978.’’; and 

5 (3) by adding at the end the following new 

6 paragraphs: 

7 ‘‘(2) The boundaries of the park are modified 

8 to include lands and interests therein comprised of 

9 Parcels 1 and 2 totaling 2.14 acres, identified as 

10 ‘Tract A’ on the map entitled ‘Kaloko-Honoko ̄hau 

11 National Historical Park Proposed Boundary Ad12 justment’, numbered PWR (PISO) 466/82,043 and 

13 dated April 2002. 

14 ‘‘(3) The maps referred to in this subsection 

15 shall be on file and available for public inspection in 

16 the appropriate offices of the National Park Serv17 ice.’’.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 528 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 528

To authorize the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment (normal trade 
            relations treatment) to the products of Armenia.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 4, 2003

Mr. Knollenberg (for himself and Mr. Pallone) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment (normal trade 
            relations treatment) to the products of Armenia.

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

SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

    Congress makes the following findings:
            (1) Armenia has been found to be in full compliance with 
        the freedom of emigration requirements under title IV of the 
        Trade Act of 1974.
            (2) The World Trade Organization's General Council voted on 
        December 10, 2002, to approve Armenia's full accession to the 
        Organization.
            (3) Since declaring its independence from the Soviet Union 
        in 1991, Armenia has made considerable progress in enacting 
        free-market reforms within a stable democratic framework.
            (4) Armenia has demonstrated a strong desire to build a 
        friendly and cooperative relationship with the United States 
        and has concluded many bilateral treaties and agreements with 
        the United States.
            (5) Total United States-Armenia bilateral trade for 2002 
        amounted to more than $134,200,000.

SEC. 2. TERMINATION OF APPLICATION OF TITLE IV OF THE TRADE ACT OF 1974 
              TO ARMENIA.

    (a) Presidential Determinations and Extensions of Nondiscriminatory 
Treatment.--Notwithstanding any provision of title IV of the Trade Act 
of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2431 et seq.), the President may--
            (1) determine that such title should no longer apply to 
        Armenia; and
            (2) after making a determination under paragraph (1) with 
        respect to Armenia, proclaim the extension of nondiscriminatory 
        treatment (normal trade relations treatment) to the products of 
        that country.
    (b) Termination of Application of Title IV.--On and after the 
effective date of the extension under subsection (a)(2) of 
nondiscriminatory treatment to the products of Armenia, title IV of the 
Trade Act of 1974 shall cease to apply to that country.
                                 <all>
```
# Current Employment Statistics Latest Numbers

Latest Numbers for Current Employment Statistics, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

- Current Employment Statistics Latest Numbers Change in Total Nonfarm Payroll Employment:					+175,000(p)  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           Change in Total Private Average Hourly Earnings for All Employees:					+$0.07(p)  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           Change in Total Private Average Weekly Hours for All Employees:					-0.1(p)  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           Percent change in Total Private Aggregate Weekly Hours for All Employees:					-0.1%(p)  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           Change in Manufacturing Average Weekly Hours for All Employees:					unchanged  in Apr 2024					Historical Data								           Change in Manufacturing Average Weekly Overtime for All Employees:					unchanged  in Apr 2024					Historical Data													           Change in Total Private Real Average Hourly Earnings for All Employees:					-$0.02(p)  in Apr 2024					Historical Data																p- preliminary
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 12

- 00417

- CR

HAMIS ATHOMAN CHANDE , Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 19th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2012

- 338

- C1

ORDER

The State has filed a motion for extension of time to file its brief in this appeal. The basis of the motion is that the appellant, who has been allowed to represent himself on appeal, has checked out the record from the district clerk, used it to prepare his brief,

and now refuses to return it to the district clerk. This refusal prevents the district attorney from filing the State’s brief. The briefing schedule is stayed. The State’s motion is dismissed as moot.Chande v. State Page 2

Appellant, Hamis Athoman Chande, is hereby ordered to retu rn the full record in its original condition and arrangement to Karen Matkin, the District Clerk of McLennan County, at the McLennan County Courthouse, 501 Washington Avenue, Annex Building, Suite 300, Waco, Texas, within 14 days from the date of this Orde r. If Chande fails or refuses to return the record, as ordered, the Court will impose appropriate sanctions to include a requirement that Chande pay for the preparation of a duplicate record or dismissal of his appeal for impairing the State’s ability to timely file a response and under our inherent authority to manage and control our docket. Chande’s actions have delayed the presentation of his appeal and it can be inferred from his efforts to delay the disposition of his appeal that it is being pursued to delay rather than achieve a just disposition. The State’s brief is not due until 30 days after the record has been returned as ordered herein and this Court is notified by Chande that the record has been received by the district clerk.

It is so ordere d.

PER CURIAM Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Order issued and filed January 30 , 2014
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 on Form 10-Q of TMP Inland Empire VI, Ltd.
(the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form
10-Q), we, Daniel L. Stephenson and John Fonseca of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(2)
The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

`Daniel L. Stephenson
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
                                                     November 12, 2002

                                                     /S/DANIEL L STEPHENSON
                                                     --------------------------

                                                     John Fonseca
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
                                                     November 12, 2002

                                                     /S/JOHN FONSECA
                                                     --------------------------`
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB Document 59 Filed 05/18/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 280
**Exhibit 23**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No’s. 333-81504 and 333-44430 on Form S-8 of our reports dated June 8,2005, relating to the consolidated financial statements of OPNET Technologies, Inc. and management’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of OPNET Technologies,Inc. for the year ended March 31, 2005. 

 

/s/    DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

McLean, Virginia 

June 8, 2005
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 WJ
Communications, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K/A-2 for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Bruce W. Diamond, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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.

A
signed original of this written certification required by Section 1350 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.



|                   |  |     |  |                                                                    
|------------------ |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: May 7, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ BRUCE W. DIAMOND                                               
|                   |  |     |  | Bruce W. Diamond                                                   
|                   |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)
[No. 32357-5-II.

Division Two.

December 22, 2005.]

#### *In the Matter of the Marriage of*Carmen R. Evans, *Respondent,*and Riley D. Evans, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Kitsap County, No. 02-3-00546-8, Anna M. Laurie and Bryan E. Chushcoff, JJ., entered September 27, 2004. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Hunt, J., concurred in by Van Deren, A.C.J., and Penoyar, J.
[No. 55114-1-I.

Division One.

November 14, 2005.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Justin Heath Phair, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Whatcom County, No. 00-1-00742-9, Steven J. Mura, J., entered September 24, 2004. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 807

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify the amount of 

the charitable deduction allowable for contributions of food inventory, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 13, 2003

Mr. HOUGHTON (for himself and Mr. LEWIS of Georgia) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify 

the amount of the charitable deduction allowable for 

contributions of food inventory, and for other purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Good Samaritan Tax 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CHARITABLE DEDUCTION FOR CONTRIBUTIONS OF 

7 FOOD INVENTORY. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (e) of section 170 of 

9 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to certain 
2

•HR 807 IH 

1 contributions of ordinary income and capital gain prop2 erty) is amended by adding at the end the following new 

3 paragraph: 

4 ‘‘(7) SPECIAL RULE FOR CONTRIBUTIONS OF

5 FOOD INVENTORY.—

6 ‘‘(A) CONTRIBUTIONS BY NON-CORPORATE

7 TAXPAYERS.—In the case of a charitable con8 tribution of food, paragraph (3) shall be applied 

9 without regard to whether or not the contribu10 tion is made by a corporation. 

11 ‘‘(B) DETERMINATION OF FAIR MARKET

12 VALUE.—For purposes of this section, in the 

13 case of a charitable contribution of food which 

14 is a qualified contribution (within the meaning 

15 of paragraph (3), as modified by subparagraph 

16 (A) of this paragraph) and which, solely by rea17 son of internal standards of the taxpayer, lack 

18 of market, or similar circumstances, cannot or 

19 will not be sold, the fair market value of such 

20 contribution shall be determined—

21 ‘‘(i) without regard to such internal 

22 standards, such lack of market, or such 

23 circumstances, and 

24 ‘‘(ii) if applicable, by taking into ac25 count the price at which the same or simi-
3

•HR 807 IH 

1 lar food items are sold by the taxpayer at 

2 the time of the contribution (or, if not so 

3 sold at such time, in the recent past).’’ 

4 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

5 subsection (a) shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

6 December 31, 2003.

Æ