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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-27-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-27-1997
<CASH>                                             173
<SECURITIES>                                     4,509
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   176
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,868
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,097
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             7
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,663
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,868
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,059)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   1,090
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        31
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A24A0388. MICHAEL ALONZA RUFUS v. THE STATE.

In 2012, Michael Alonza Rufus was convicted of possession of marijuana with

intent to distribute and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. 

He filed a timely motion for new trial, which the trial court denied, and we affirmed

his convictions on appeal. Rufus v. State, 324 Ga. App. XXVIII (Case No.

A13A1416, Sept. 30, 2013). In March 2021, Rufusfiled a second motion for new trial

based on newly discovered evidence. The trial court denied his motion, and he

appeals therefrom.

Rufus’s March 2021 motion for new trialmust be construed as an extraordinary

motion for new trial because it was filed after the trial court denied his first motion

for new trial and is based on a claim of new evidence. See OCGA §§ 5-5-40 (a);

5-5-41 (b); Mitchum v. State, 306 Ga. 878, 879-882 (1) (a) (834 SE2d 65) (2019). An

appeal from the denial of an extraordinary motion for new trial requires compliance

with the discretionary appeal procedure set forth in OCGA § 5-6- 35. See OCGA §

5-6-35 (a) (7); Balkcom v. State, 227 Ga. App. 327, 331-332 (489 SE2d 129) (1997).

“The requirements of OCGA § 5-6-35 are jurisdictional, and this court cannot accept

an appeal not made in compliance therewith.” Boyle v. State, 190 Ga. App. 734, 734

(380 SE2d 57) (1989). Rufus’s failure to file an application for a discretionary appeal

deprives us of jurisdiction over this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

November 08, 2023

11/08/2023
USDA 

United States Department of Agriculture FEB Z Z 2017 -

Food Safety and Inspection Service 

ANTI-RETALIATION/REPRISAL 


POLICY STATEMENT 


It is the policy of the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) that no person shall be subjected 


to retaliation/reprisal for participation in Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) process, 


whistle blowing, or speaking out against practices he or she believes may constitute unlawful 


discrimination. Retaliation/Reprisal is unlawful and will not be condoned or tolerated in the 


FSIS workplace. 


Retaliation/Reprisal is defined as any negative treatment or adverse action imposed on an 


individual for engaging in protected activity. Protected activity includes filing a charge of 


discrimination, participation in an employment discrimination proceeding, or otherwise opposing 


unlawful discrimination. Managers and supervisors bear a special responsibility and obligation 


to ensure that they do not engage in or tolerate retaliation/reprisal in the workplace. 


An employee, former employee, or applicant for employment, who believes that he or she has 


been subjected to employment discrimination based on retaliation/reprisal, should contact the 


Civil Rights Staff (CRS) to initiate a complaint of discrimination based on retaliation/reprisal. 


An aggrieved person must initiate contact with an EEO Counselor within 45-calendar days ofthe 


date ofthe matter he/she believes is reprisal/retaliation. 


Any FSIS supervisor or manager who is found to have engaged in retaliation/reprisal will be 


subjected to appropriate disciplinary action, up to and including reprimand, demotion, 


suspension, or removal. 


Ifyou have a question or need assistance, please contact the Civil Rights Staff at 


1 (800) 269-6912 or by email at: AskCRD@fsis.usda.gov. You can find additional information 


about the FSIS EEO and Civil Rights Program at: 


http://www.fsis. usda. gov /wps/portal/informational/ aboutfsis/ civil-rights. 


Alfred 

(¥V. Almanza ~ Administrator 

An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Cassanova DYSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-7647.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 14, 2016.

Decided: Jan. 20, 2016.

*163Michael Cassanova Dyson, Appellant Pro Se. John Castle Parr, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Michael Cassanoya Dyson appeals the district court’s order denying his* 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to Amendment 750 to the *U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual*(2011). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See United States v.*Dyson, No. 5:09-cr-00021-FPS-JES-6

(NJD.W.Va. Sept. 29, 2015). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
OFFlCE OFTHEATTORNEYGENERALOFTEXAS **AUSTIN** February 13, 1939
Bon. 3. E. Whltmore Lfvestook Ssnftary Commission 304 :v*T. TaggonerBuilding Fort Korth, Texas hlr a?. Fllitnore:

as towhether funds 018 1456 has b
the stat\lte may **be** oxpen ZXatutes, llmLti3 n collectedunder

, ..iediciue

C:, Surgery :;rovidcsthat tko funds essary esynaes of t>e all be applied to cozpentha Revised Civil Statutesproera1 district and oountp attorState nhnll file and **prOmcut** prooecding 13 the nama of the vlolatlons tixreof on requsst of anymember of said Doard." This articlemakes the prosecutions of violations of the Vetorlnarg Sdical ZraotlceAct the eaprensHon. J. E. %hit?nore, February 13, 1939, Page 2
duty of the various county and distriot attorneys of this state.

Ax%iole 7461 relates to the renewal of licenses and in the eveot the license Is oat renewedwithin sixtydnys after expiration,the applicant nust then take the examination as requiredby the Hoard. In that event, the examlnotion fee would be controlledby Artiole 7456 and it is our opfnion that the expenditureof the $1.00 license fee is controlledby the purposes prescribed In Artiole 7456.

It Is the opinion of this Departmentt&t you would not have authority to expend funds collected fro3 ronerral

of licenses tomake invastig>tiono,file ch~~rges and meke prosecutions for violation of theVeterinary Mcdioal Practice Act. Very truly yours ATTORRZT GMXR.!LL OF TEXAS

APPROVED:

ATTOR;~Z"Y

GEXZRAL
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2506 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2506

        To suspend temporarily the duty on photographic gelatin.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 23, 1993

 Mr. Quillen introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To suspend temporarily the duty on photographic gelatin.

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

SECTION 1. TEMPORARY DUTY SUSPENSION.

    Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
the United States is amended by inserting in numerical sequence the 
following new heading:

      

       ``  9902.35.01  Photographic gelatin (provided for in subheading                            No change        No change        On or before 12/   
                        3503.00.50).............................................  Free                                                31/94           ''

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendment made by section 1 applies with respect to goods 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse consumption, on or after the 15th 
day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-10633

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

ALICE FAY TURNER, 

Also Known as Alice O’ Brian,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

No. 3:05-CR-249-2

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Alice Turner has moved to withdraw

and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967). Turner has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record

and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, the

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further

responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 30, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 39 (Tuesday, February 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 12534]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-4787]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-4649-N-06]


Announcement of OMB Approval Number for Hope for Homeownership of 
Single Family Homes Program (HOPE 3)

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and 
Development, HUD.

ACTION: Announcement of OMB Approval Number.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to announce the OMB approval 
number for the collection of information pertaining to Hope for 
Homeownership of Single Family Homes Program (HOPE 3).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Patricia Mason, Department of 
Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20410, telephone (202) 708-3226. This is not a toll-free number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended), this notice advises 
that OMB has responded to the Department's request for approval of the 
information collection pertaining to Hope for Homeownership of Single 
Family Homes Program (HOPE 3). The OMB approval number for this 
information collection is 2506-0128, which expires on August 31, 2003.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number.

    Dated: February 15, 2001.
Donna M. Abbenante,
Acting General Deputy Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-4787 Filed 2-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-29-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                         0000831246
<NAME>                                Franklin Credit Management Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                    1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S Dollars

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.00
<CASH>                                         6,759,656
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  204,291,565
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (21,457,445)
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               4,990,790
<PP&E>                                         900,805
<DEPRECIATION>                                 118,493
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 189,682,655
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          5,985,849
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       59,167
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   189,682,655
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               16,231,612
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               11,804,022
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             9,673,214
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                334,380
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   334,380
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .06



</TABLE>
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18-0495V

Filed: April 23, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

BETH RAITER,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Special Processing Unit (SPU);

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine 

Administration (SIRVA)

Howard Dale Mishkind, Mishkind Law Firm Co., L.P.A., Beachwood, Ohio, for petitioner.

Christine Mary Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On April 4, 2018, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2

(the “Vaccine 

Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered the Table injury of shoulder injury related to 

vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) after receiving an influenza vaccination on September 

10, 2015. Petition at ¶¶ 2-3. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of 

the Office of Special Masters.

On April 23, 2019, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes

that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

at 1. Specifically, respondent has “concluded that petitioner’s claim meets the Table 

 

1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This 

means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine 

Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the 

disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned 

agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from 

public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this 

case, undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in 

accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management 

and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755.
criteria for SIRVA.” Id. at 3. Respondent further agrees that petitioner has satisfied all 

legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. at 4. 

In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master
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 hereby certifies, in his capacity as
Chief Executive Officer of Quaker City Bancorp, Inc. (the Company), for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on his knowledge:



| | 1. |  | the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ended June 30, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: September 25, 2003



/s/    FREDERIC R. (RICK) MCGILLFrederic R. (Rick) McGill Chief Executive
Officer




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Quaker City Bancorp, Inc. and will be retained by Quaker City Bancorp, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon its request.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.<TABLE> <S> <C><ARTICLE>    5<LEGEND>    This schedule contains summary financial information extracted fromthe third quarter 2000 report on Form 10-Q for LabOne, Inc. and is qualified inits entirety by reference to such financial statements.<S>                                                      <C><PERIOD-TYPE>                                          9-MOS<PERIOD-START><FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                Dec-31-2000<PERIOD-END>                                     Sep-30-2000<CASH>                                             1,605,796<SECURITIES>                                               0<RECEIVABLES>                                     33,910,190<ALLOWANCES>                                       3,479,097<INVENTORY>                                        3,077,548<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  43,262,675<PP&E>                                            87,475,172<DEPRECIATION>                                    42,424,856<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   124,102,559<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             20,276,469<BONDS>                                           35,408,099<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0<PREFERRED>                                                0<COMMON>                                             130,500<OTHER-SE>                                        66,228,524<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     124,102,559<SALES>                                                    0<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 123,368,602<CGS>                                                      0<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     82,047,170<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           0<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   1,813,071<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 1,771,272<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    3,443,265<INCOME-TAX>                                       2,304,500<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                1,138,765<DISCONTINUED>                                             0<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0<CHANGES>                                                  0<NET-INCOME>                                       1,138,765<EPS-BASIC>                                              0.1<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0.1</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-1803

TAMORAH L. CHAPMAN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

TIMOTHY GEITHNER, Secretary of the Treasury,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District 

Judge. (1:11-cv-01016-GBL-TRJ)

Submitted: November 30, 2012 Decided: January 25, 2013

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tamorah L. Chapman, Appellant Pro Se. Julie Ann Edelstein, 

Bernard G. Kim, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, 

Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Tamorah L. Chapman, a former employee of the Internal 

Revenue Service, appeals the district court’s order granting the 

Secretary of the Treasury’s motions for judgment on the 

pleadings and summary judgment, and dismissing her employment 

discrimination complaint. We have reviewed the record and find 

no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave for 

Chapman to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, we affirm the 

judgment for the reasons stated by the district court in its 

memorandum opinion. See Chapman v. Geithner, No. 1:11-cv-01016-

GBL-TRJ (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 30, 2012 & entered May 1, 2012). 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED