alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 19

- 2409

_____________________________
T IMOTHY L UCIER , a n i ndividual
,
Petitioner
,

v.

W ILLIAMS D AIRY T RUCKING , I NC ., a f oreign f or

- profit

c orporation
, A LEXANDER J UNIOR B ROOKS , M ICHAEL D EVON M ILLER , a nd
, M ARIA M ARCELL Y OUNG , a s i ndividuals
, Respondent s

.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Certiorari

— Original Jurisdiction

.

August 8, 2019

P ER C URIAM

. The petition for writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.100(c)(1).

L EWIS , R OWE , and K ELSEY , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Jordan Redavid of Fischer Redavid PLLC, Hollywood
, for Petitioner

. No appearance for Respondent s

.
#### Best v. Kennelty et ux.

*Richard S. Silvis,*for plaintiff.

*Frederick T. Seymour,*for defendants.

June 13, 1951.

Laird, P. J.,

— This is a petition by plaintiff, who is in possession of land in Hempfield Township, for a rule on defendants to bring an action of ejectment under the Act of March 8,1889, P. L. 10, as amended by the Act of April 16, 1903, P. L. 212, to which preliminary objections have been filed by defendants.

The act of assembly above referred to under which this action is commenced has been suspended by Pa. R. C. P. 1455 as adopted by the Supreme Court. See note in 12 PS §1543,3 Anderson Pa. Civil Practice 580.

The remedy sought by plaintiff herein is now exercised under a form of action to quiet title. See Pa. R. C. P. 1061 and comment thereunder. As provided in rule 1061 the procedure to quiet title is the same as the procedure in an action of assumpsit.

The procedure herein not being in conformity with the rules as provided in actions of this character, the preliminary objections filed by defendants must be sustained.

And now, to wit, June 13,1951, after argument and after due and careful consideration, it is ordered, ad*425judged and decreed that the preliminary objections filed by defendants be and the same hereby are sustained and the action dismissed without prejudice.
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the  Registration  Statement of
Klamath First Bancorp,  Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-4002) of our report dated
October 30, 1997, on the financial  statements appearing in the Annual Report to
stockholders  of Klamath First  Bancorp,  Inc. for the year ended  September 30,
1997.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Portland, Oregon
December 23, 1997

<PAGE>
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 Quarterly Report of CEC Entertainment, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 1, 2007 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned certifies to his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods
presented in the Report.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Richard M. FrankRichard M. FrankChief Executive OfficerMay 11, 2007


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to CEC
Entertainment, Inc. and will be retained by CEC Entertainment, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2014245EN.01003201.xml

| 28.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 245/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 245/32

---

Action brought on 3 June 2014 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-50/14)

2014/C 245/43

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the Commission decision refusing to grant an expatriation allowance to the applicant

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant requests the Civil Service Tribunal to:

| — | annul the decision of 3 October 2013 refusing to grant an expatriation allowance to the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 3 October 2013 refusing to grant an expatriation allowance to the applicant;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > The National-Bank Act as Amended, The Federal Reserve Act, and Other Laws Relating to National Banks

              														The National-Bank Act as Amended, The Federal Reserve Act, and Other Laws Relating to National Banks, February 6, 1920.						https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/432,			accessed on September 18, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
39185.

#### HARRIS v. THE STATE.

Nichols, Presiding Judge.

The defendant was convicted of possessing a quantity of non-tax-paid liquor. The defendant was sentenced on July 1, 1961, to twelve months in a public works camp; however, such sentence provided that upon the payment of a fine on or before August 1, 1961, the sentence would be suspended during such time as the defendant complied with various requirements (probation). While the defendant’s motion for new trial, based on the usual general grounds only, was pending in the trial court the defendant tendered the amount of the fine to a deputy sheriff who accepted the same conditionally, the receipt stating that it would be refunded in the event a new trial was granted: *797Thereafter, the trial court overruled the motion for new trial and the defendant excepted. The solicitor has filed a motion to dismiss the writ of error on the ground that the payment of the amount of the fine to the deputy sheriff rendered the questions moot.

Decided November 16, 1961.

*Claude N. Morris,*for plaintiff in error.

*Jack Murr, Solicitor,*contra.

1. Where a sentence provides for a fine and a suspended period of confinement during good behavior the payment of the fine does not finally dispose of the case so as to render moot a motion for new trial. See *Perry v. State,*62 Ga. App. 115 (2) (8 SE2d 425). Accordingly, whether the defendant’s payment to the deputy sheriff constituted a payment of the fine need not be considered. The motion to dismiss the writ of error is denied.

2. The evidence, though circumstantial, showed that the non-tax-paid liquor was found on the premises occupied by the defendant, that it was found near a private path leading from the defendant’s yard to a hog pen, and that, while the liquor was nearer the public highway than the defendant’s house, there was no evidence that anyone had gone up or down the steep bank which was located between the liquor and the highway. There was no evidence of anyone other than the defendant having control of the premises. The evidence, though circumstantial, was sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis save that of the guilt of the accused (see *Walker v. State,*90 Ga. App. 183, 82 SE2d 258), and the trial court did not err in overruling the defendant’s motion for new trial based upon the usual general grounds only.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Frankum and Jordan, JJ., concur.*
Exhibit 32.1
 
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act 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.
 /s/ Arthur
A. Rodney

Arthur
A. RodneyChief Executive OfficerApril 15, 2009
 The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany this Report pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §1350, and 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.
Exhibit No. 11

                                    CNS, INC.
               Computation of Net Income per Share of Common Stock
                                   (unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                           Three Months Ended          Six Months Ended
                                                 June 30,                   June 30,
                                       -------------------------   -------------------------
                                           1998          1997          1998         1997
                                       -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------
<S>                                    <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>        
NET INCOME
   Net income                          $   815,888   $ 2,613,473   $   831,174   $ 3,934,966
                                       ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========



BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE:
   Weighted average number of common
      shares outstanding
                                        18,445,000    19,277,000    18,419,000    19,241,000
                                       ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========

   Basic earnings per share            $       .04   $       .14   $       .05   $       .20
                                       ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========



DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE
   Weighted average number of common
      shares outstanding                18,445,000    19,277,000    18,419,000    19,241,000
   Incentive stock options                  66,000       436,000        81,000       485,000
   Nonqualified stock options               97,000       266,000       132,000       296,000
                                       -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------
                                        18,608,000    19,979,000    18,632,000    20,022,000
                                       ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========

   Diluted earnings per share          $       .04   $       .13   $       .04   $       .20
                                       ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========
</TABLE>


                                       12
§ 26.6 Equivalence assessment. ( a ) The criteria to be used by the parties to assess equivalence are listed in appendix D of this subpart. Information pertaining to the criteria under European Community (EC) competence will be provided by the EC.
( b ) The authorities of the parties will establish and communicate to each other their draft programs for assessing the equivalence of the respective regulatory systems in terms of quality assurance of the products and consumer protection. These programs will be carried out, as deemed necessary by the regulatory authorities, for post- and preapproval inspections and for various product classes or processes.
( c ) The equivalence assessment shall include information exchanges (including inspection reports), joint training, and joint inspections for the purpose of assessing regulatory systems and the authorities' capabilities. In conducting the equivalence assessment, the parties will ensure that efforts are made to save resources.
( d ) Equivalence assessment for authorities added to appendix B of this subpart after the effective date described in § 26.80(a) will be conducted as described in this subpart, as soon as practicable.
§ 7.49 Recall communications. ( a ) *General.* A recalling firm is responsible for promptly notifying each of its affected direct accounts about the recall. The format, content, and extent of a recall communication should be commensurate with the hazard of the product being recalled and the strategy developed for that recall. In general terms, the purpose of a recall communication is to convey: ( 1 ) That the product in question is subject to a recall.
( 2 ) That further distribution or use of any remaining product should cease immediately.
( 3 ) Where appropriate, that the direct account should in turn notify its customers who received the product about the recall.
( 4 ) Instructions regarding what to do with the product.
( b ) *Implementation.* A recall communication can be accomplished by telegrams, mailgrams, or first class letters conspicuously marked, preferably in bold red type, on the letter and the envelope: “drug [or food, biologic, etc.] recall [or correction]”. The letter and the envelope should be also marked: “urgent” for class I and class II recalls and, when appropriate, for class III recalls. Telephone calls or other personal contacts should ordinarily be confirmed by one of the above methods and/or documented in an appropriate manner.
( c ) *Contents.* ( 1 ) A recall communication should be written in accordance with the following guidelines: ( i ) Be brief and to the point;
( ii ) Identify clearly the product, size, lot number(s), code(s) or serial number(s) and any other pertinent descriptive information to enable accurate and immediate identification of the product;
( iii ) Explain concisely the reason for the recall and the hazard involved, if any;
( iv ) Provide specific instructions on what should be done with respect to the recalled products; and
( v ) Provide a ready means for the recipient of the communication to report to the recalling firm whether it has any of the product, e.g., by sending a postage-paid, self-addressed postcard or by allowing the recipient to place a collect call to the recalling firm.
( 2 ) The recall communication should not contain irrelevant qualifications, promotional materials, or any other statement that may detract from the message. Where necessary, followup communications should be sent to those who fail to respond to the initial recall communication.
( d ) *Responsibility of recipient.* Consignees that receive a recall communication should immediately carry out the instructions set forth by the recalling firm and, where necessary, extend the recall to its consignees in accordance with paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                                    FORM 8-K

                Current Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
                       The Securities Exchange Act of 1934

                          Date of Report: JULY 24, 2003

                        Commission File Number: 000-18053

                                   LASERSCOPE

             (Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

           CALIFORNIA                                    77-0049527
(State or other jurisdiction of             (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
 incorporation or organization)

                               3070 ORCHARD DRIVE
                             SAN JOSE, CA 95134-2011
                    (Address of principal executive offices)

                                 (408) 943-0636
              (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

                                 NOT APPLICABLE
          (Former name or former address, if changed since last report)

<PAGE>

ITEM 7(c). EXHIBITS

      99.1 Press release dated July 24, 2003.

ITEM 9. REGULATION FD DISCLOSURE

      The information in this Form 8-K and the Exhibit attached hereto is
intended to be furnished under Item 12, Results of Operations and Financial
Condition, and is being furnished under Item 9, Regulation FD Disclosure, in
accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission Release No. 33-8216 dated
March 27, 2003.

      On July 24, 2003, Laserscope issued a press release announcing its
financial results for the quarter ended June 30, 2003. A copy of the release is
attached as Exhibit 99.1 and incorporated by reference herein.

      The information in this Form 8-K and the Exhibit attached hereto shall not
be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act") or otherwise subject to the liabilities of
that Section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended or the Exchange Act, regardless of
any general incorporation language in such filing.

<PAGE>

                                    SIGNATURE

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

                                           LASERSCOPE
                                           (Registrant)

Date: July 24, 2003                    By: /s/ Dennis LaLumandiere
                                           ------------------------------------
                                           Dennis LaLumandiere
                                           Vice President, Finance,
                                           Chief Financial Officer and Secretary


<PAGE>

                                INDEX TO EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT
NUMBER            DESCRIPTION
-------           -------------------------------

99.1              PRESS RELEASE DATED JULY 24, 2003.
Editorial Note on Part 874
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 874 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 874.1060 Acoustic chamber for audiometric testing. ( a ) *Identification.* An acoustic chamber for audiometric testing is a room that is intended for use in conducting diagnostic hearing evaluations and that eliminates sound reflections and provides isolation from outside sounds.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 874.9.
[51 FR 40389, Nov. 6, 1986, as amended at 61 FR 1121, Jan. 16, 1996; 66 FR 38800, July 25, 2001]
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 5.1


July 9, 1999





The Ackerley Group, Inc.
1301 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4000
Seattle, Washington 98101

        RE:    THE ACKERLEY GROUP, INC.;
               LEGAL OPINION REGARDING VALIDITY OF SECURITIES OFFERED

Ladies and Gentlemen:

        We are acting as counsel for The Ackerley Group, Inc., a Delaware
corporation ("Company"), in connection with the registration under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended ("Act"), of 4,830,000 shares of the Company's
common stock, $.01 par value per share ("Shares"), consisting of (1) 3,000,000
shares to be issued by the Company, including 630,000 shares to be issued upon
exercise of options to cover over-allotments ("Company Shares"), and (1)
1,200,000 shares to be sold by certain selling shareholders ("Selling
Shareholders") of the Company ("Selling Shareholders Shares").

        In connection with the offering of the Shares, we have examined: (1) the
form of Underwriting Agreement between various underwriters, the Company and the
Selling Shareholders; (2) the Registration Statement; and (3) such other
documents as we have deemed necessary to form the opinion expressed below. As to
various questions of fact material to such opinion, where relevant facts were
not independently established, we have relied upon statements of officers of
Company and of the Selling Shareholders, or representations and warranties of
the Company and the Selling Shareholders contained in the form of Underwriting
Agreement.

        Based and relying solely upon the foregoing, we are of the opinion that:

        1.      Subject to the issuance of an appropriate order by the
Commission declaring the Registration Statement effective, and the compliance
with applicable state securities and "blue sky" laws, the Company Shares will
be, upon sale and delivery thereof and receipt by the Company of full payment as
set forth in the Registration Statement, validly issued, fully paid and
nonassessable.

        2.      The Selling Shareholders Shares are validly issued, fully paid
and nonassessable.


<PAGE>   2
The Ackerley Group, Inc.
July 9, 1999
Page 2


        Consent is hereby given to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit to
the Registration Statement and to the legal reference to this firm under the
caption "Legal Matters" as having passed upon the validity of the Shares. In
giving this consent, we do not admit that we are experts within the meaning of
the Act.

                                            Very truly yours,

                                            GRAHAM & DUNN
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.1

                            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 Deswell Industries, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of our knowledge, 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.

Date: September 15, 2003               By:  /s/ Richard Lau
                                           _____________________________
                                                Richard Lau
                                       Chief Executive Officer

Date: September 15, 2003               By:  /s/ C. P. Li
                                           _____________________________
                                                C. P. Li
                                       Chief Financial Officer