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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE MOST RECENT QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q OF
RESEARCH FRONTIERS INCORPORATED FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       6,679,742
<SECURITIES>                                 1,215,795
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,579
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,025,909
<PP&E>                                         228,319
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,277,982
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          202,399
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    11,297,152
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,277,982
<SALES>                                        103,750
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               398,266
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,661,558
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (2,263,292)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (2,263,292)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.21)


</TABLE>
§ 1010.117 Cost sheet, signature of Senior Executive Officer. ( a ) *Cost sheet—Format.* ( 1 ) The cost sheet shall be prepared in accordance with the format found in section XXVI of the appendix to this part: Cost Sheet Format and paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
( 2 ) *Cost sheet instructions.* ( i ) All amounts for cost sheet items will be entered before the purchaser signs the receipt. However, any costs that are identical for all lots may be pre-printed.
( ii ) If a central water or sewer system will be used in all or part of the subdivision and a private system in all or other parts, then the portion that does not apply to the purchaser's lot shall be crossed out.
( iii ) If individual private systems may be used prior to the availability of service from any central system and the purchaser is not required to connect to any central system, both figures may be entered or only the highest cost figures may be used with a parenthetical explanation or footnote. If the purchaser is required to connect to any central system and discontinue the use of his private system when central service is available, both cost figures shall be given, together with an explanation or footnote.
( iv ) If there is a one time, lump sum “availability fee” which is assessed to the purchaser in connection with a central utility, include under “other” and identify.
( v ) Dues and assessments need be included only if they are involuntary regardless of use.
( vi ) At the discretion of the Director, where there is extreme diversity in the figures for different areas of the subdivision, variations may be permitted as to whether the figures will be printed, entered manually, or a range of costs used or any combination of these features.
( vii ) The estimated annual taxes shall be based upon the projected valuation of the lot after sale to a purchaser.
( b ) *Signature of the Senior Executive Officer.* The Senior Executive Officer or a duly authorized agent shall sign the property report. Facsimile signatures may be used for purposes of reproduction of the property report.
HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2023 Fiscal Transparency Report…Liberia

# 					2023 Fiscal Transparency Report: Liberia			

 In this section										

                -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Liberia  

## Government-by-Government Assessments: Liberia 

During the review period, the government made significant progress by making its executive budget proposal publicly available within a reasonable period, by making major state-owned enterprise debt information publicly available, and by making basic information on natural resource extraction awards publicly available.The government did not make its enacted budget or end-of-year report publicly available within a reasonable period.Information on debt obligations was widely and easily accessible to the public, including online.The government maintained off-budget accounts not subject to audit or oversight.  The supreme audit institution did not meet international standards of independence and did not make its audit reports publicly available within a reasonable period.The government specified in law or regulation and appeared to follow in practice the criteria and procedures for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses, but there are reports of corruption and inconsistent application of regulations in practice.

Liberia’s fiscal transparency would be improved by:

-  Making the enacted budget and end-of-year report publicly available within a reasonable period;
-  Eliminating off-budget accounts or subjecting them to adequate oversight and audit;
-  Ensuring the supreme audit institution meets international standards of independence;
-  Making supreme audit institution audit reports publicly available within a reasonable period; and
-  Ensuring the laws or regulations for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses are followed in practice.

## View report by:

### On This Page

                    -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Liberia  

Tags

Bureau of African AffairsBureau of Economic and Business AffairsDivision for International Finance and DevelopmentLiberia

Back to Top

                - White House
                - USA.gov
                - Office of the Inspector General
                - Archives
                - Contact Us

follow us
FacebookXInstagramYouTubeFlickrGovDelivery

              - Privacy Policy
              - Accessibility Statement
              - Copyright Information
              - FOIA
              - No FEAR Act

## U.S. Department *of* State

#### The Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

COTY TRAVIS WATERS, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 21-10193 

D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00098-SRB-1 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 14, 2023

**

Before: FERNANDEZ, FRIEDLAND, and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

Coty Travis Waters appeals from the district court’s order denying his 

motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, see United 

States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278, 1281 (9th Cir. 2021), we affirm. 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

FEB 22 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 21-10193 

Waters contends that the district court improperly treated U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 

as binding, in contravention of this court’s opinion in United States v. Aruda, 993 

F.3d 797, 802 (9th Cir. 2021), when determining that he continued to pose a danger 

to the community. We need not decide this issue because any error was harmless 

in light of the district court’s conclusion that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors did 

not support release. See United States v. Wright, 46 F..4th 938, 944-48 (9th Cir. 

2022) (erroneous application of § 1B1.13 is harmless if the district court’s analysis 

of the § 3553(a) factors independently supports the denial of compassionate 

release). Contrary to Waters’s argument, the district court did not abuse its 

discretion in concluding that the § 3553(a) factors, particularly the seriousness of 

the offense, did not favor compassionate release. See Keller, 2 F.4th at 1284 

(finding no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of compassionate 

release under § 3553(a) after noting “the deference we must afford the district 

court when it makes these discretionary decisions”). Waters’s contention that the 

district court should have given greater weight to his mitigating arguments and the 

unanticipated harshness of having to serve his sentence during a pandemic is 

unavailing. See United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir. 

2009) (“The weight to be given the various factors in a particular case is for the 

discretion of the district court.”). 

AFFIRMED.
42170.

#### DANIELS v. THE STATE.

Hall, Judge.

The defendant was indicted for murder and convicted of voluntary manslaughter and received a sentence of sixteen years. On appeal the defendant enumerates as error the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury on the law of involuntary manslaughter.

*265Argued July 6, 1966

Decided September 6, 1966.

*Pritchard & Thomas, M. C. Pritchard,*for appellant.

*Dewey Hayes, Solicitor General, Delmar Minchew,*for appellee.

1. The testimony of witnesses presented by the defendant and the defendant’s unsworn statement showed that the gun fired accidentally while the defendant was passing it to the deceased at his request, and that the defendant had no intention to shoot the deceased. The court charged the jury on the law applicable to accidental and unintentional shooting, and that they should acquit the defendant if they found the deceased’s death resulted from an accident. Under the evidence and the charge in this case, the court did not err in failing to charge the law of involuntary manslaughter. *Washington v. State,*137 Ga. 218, 222 (73 SE 512); *Golatt v. State,*130 Ga. 18 (60 SE 107); *Daniel v. State,*171 Ga. 335, 342 (155 SE 478). There was no evidence that the defendant killed the deceased in the commission of a lawful act without due caution and circumspection, as there was in *Ware v. State,*101 Ga. App. 246 (113 SE2d 470) and other cases cited by the defendant.

2. During the solicitor’s argument to the jury the defendant objected to argument in which the solicitor referred to the defendant as a killer as prejudicial and improper. In view of the evidence before the jury, the trial court did not err in failing to correct, reprimand, or admonish the solicitor. *Revill v. State,*210 Ga. 139, 140 (78 SE2d 12); *Byrd v. State,*78 Ga. App. 824, 833 (52 SE2d 330).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Nichols, P. J., and Deen, J., concur.*
**EXHIBIT 11.1**

 

THE NAVIGATORSGROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

 

COMPUTATION OF PER SHAREEARNINGS

 

Earnings Per Share of CommonStock and Common Stock Equivalents

*($ andshares in thousands, except per share data)*

 
| ** **                                                          | ** ** | **Three Months Ended** | ** ** | **Nine Months Ended**  | ** ** |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|------------------------|------------|------------------------|------------|
| ** **                                                          | ** ** | **September 30,** | ** ** | **September 30,** | ** ** |
| ** **                                                          | ** ** | **2005**               | ** ** | **2004**               | ** ** | **2005** | ** ** | **2004** | ** ** |
|                                                                |       |                   |       |                   |       |   |   |   |   |
| Net income (loss)  applicable to common stock                       |       | $                      | (12,725    | )                      | $          | 6,280 |   | $ | 8,254 |   | $ | 24,230 |   |
|                                                                |       |                   |       |                   |       |   |   |   |   |
| Average  number of common shares outstanding                        |       | 12,791                 |       | 12,612                 |       | 12,744 |   | 12,584 |   |
|                                                                |       |                   |       |                   |       |   |   |   |   |
| Net income (loss)  per share - Basic                                |       | $                      | (0.99      | )                      | $          | 0.50 |   | $ | 0.65 |   | $ | 1.93 |   |
|                                                                |       |                   |       |                   |       |   |   |   |   |
| Average  number of common shares outstanding                        |       | 12,791                 |       | 12,612                 |       | 12,744 |   | 12,584 |   |
| Add: Assumed exercise of stock options and  vesting of stock grants |       | —                 |       | 67                     |       | 105 |   | 104 |   |
|                                                                |       |                   |       |                   |       |   |   |   |   |
| Common and  common equivalent shares outstanding                    |       | 12,791                 |       | 12,679                 |       | 12,849 |   | 12,688 |   |
|                                                                |       |                   |       |                   |       |   |   |   |   |
| Net income (loss)  per share - Diluted                              |       | $                      | (0.99      | )                      | $          | 0.50 |   | $ | 0.64 |   | $ | 1.91 |   |

 

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

THOMAS J. GRECO AND RICHARD J.

GRECO, TRADING AS TGRG, LLP,

SUCCESSOR TO THOMAS J. GRECO,

ERIC KORNFELD AND MITCHELL

KORNFELD,

 Petitioners

 v.

CITIZENS BANK OF PENNSYLVANIA,

SUCCESSOR TO UNITED PENN BANK

AND MELLON BANK, N.A.,

 Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 56 MAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 28th day of April, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the 
unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets and unaudited condensed
consolidated statements of operations found on pages 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the
Company's Form 10-QSB for the year to date, and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         285,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  252,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    536,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,335,000
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              25,495,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       10,229,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                     3,876,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  (2,140,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                25,495,000
<SALES>                                        751,000         
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,290,000         
<CGS>                                        1,085,000          
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,085,000         
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0         
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (896,000)        
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (646,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (646,000)         
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.11)   
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.11)

</TABLE>
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 21 - 0126

_________________ IN RE THE REINSTATEMENT OF THE DRIVER'S LICENSE OF CHARLEE BLAYLOCK,

Petitioner and Appellant. O R D E R

_________________ Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for submission on briefs to a five - justice panel of this Court. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the Honorable Brenda Gilbert , District Judge . For the Court,

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 2 2022

02/02/2022
Case Number: DA 21-0126
#### Charles R. Sejalon, Appellant, *v.*William H. Woolverton, as President of the New York Transfer Company, Respondent.

Ahpeal by the plaintiff from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of Hew- York, borough of Manhattan, in favor of the defendant, upon a trial had, without a jury.

William H. Chorosh, for appellant.

Lockwood *&*Hill (Joseph E. Russell, Jr., of counsel), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

There was sufficient evidence adduced upon the trial to warrant the justice in finding, as is assumed from the judgment, that the wheels were transported by the defendant, under a special contract, at the plaintiff’s risk of damage.

The burden was therefore upon the plaintiff to show facts taking the case out of the operation of the exemption clause. Whitworth v Erie R. Co., 87 N. Y. 413, 419; Canfield v. Baltimore *&*Ohio R. R. Co., 93 id. 532. This he wholly failed to do, and, under the circumstances, we have no alternative other than to affirm, the judgment.

Present: Beekmait, P. J., G-iegebioh and O’Gobmait, JJ.

Judgment affirmed; with costs.
§ 21.6370 Authorization of transportation services. ( a ) *General.* VA shall authorize transportation services necessary for a veteran to pursue a vocational training program under this temporary program. Transportation services include: ( 1 ) Transportation for evaluation, reevaluation or counseling authorized under § 21.376 of this part;
( 2 ) Inter- and intraregional travel which may be authorized under § 21.370 (except for (b)(2)(iii)(B)) and § 21.372 of this part;
( 3 ) Special transportation allowance authorized under § 21.154 of this part;
( 4 ) Commuting to and from training and seeking employment as authorized under paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1524(b))
( b ) *Reimbursement.* Payment of transportation services authorized by VA shall normally be made in arrears and in the same manner as tuition, fees and other services authorized under this program. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1524(b))
( c ) *Transportation payment.* A veteran may be reimbursed for the costs of commuting to and from training and seeking employment if he or she requests such assistance and VA determines after careful examination of the veteran's situation, and subject to the limitation contained in paragraph (d) of this section, that the veteran would be unable to pursue training without such assistance. VA may: ( 1 ) Reimburse the facility at which the veteran is training if the facility provides transportation or related services;
( 2 ) Reimburse the veteran for his or her actual commuting expense. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1524(b))
( d ) *Limitations.* Payment of commuting expenses may not be made for any period: ( 1 ) Except during the period of training and the first three months of employment services;
( 2 ) When a program participant is employed;
( 3 ) In which a program participant is eligible for, and entitled to, payment of commuting costs through other VA and non-VA programs;
( 4 ) In which it becomes feasible for the veteran to commute to school with family, friends or fellow students. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1524(b))
( e ) *Amount which may be paid.* VA will reimburse the veteran for his or her actual cost, not to exceed $70 per month. Necessary supportive documentation must be submitted with each request for reimbursement. Payment will be made monthly or at longer intervals as may be agreed to in the IWRP. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1524(b))
( f ) *Nonduplication.* A veteran eligible for reimbursement of transportation services under this section and § 21.154 of this part may only receive the benefit provided under § 21.154 of this part.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1524(b))
§ 61.96 Grant for case management services—awards. ( a ) *Funding.* Grants for case management services will be offered from the current Grant and Per Diem Program budget and will be limited annually by VA's funding availability and commitments to existing programs.
( b ) *Use of grant funds for administrative costs.* Grant funds may be used for the following administrative purposes ( 1 ) Case management staff;
( 2 ) Transportation for the case manager;
( 3 ) Cell phones and computers to facilitate home visits and other case management activities associated with the grant; and
( 4 ) Office furniture for the use of the case management staff.
( c ) *Awards.* VA will execute an agreement and make payments to the grantee in accordance with the award and funding actions applicable to the Grant and Per Diem Program as described in § 61.61.