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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       6,120,279
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       8,724,742
<DEPRECIATION>                              (2,532,066)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,521,398
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          190,043
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     3,031,618
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,732,085
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,521,398
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               851,664
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               395,797
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             205,512
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                250,355
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            250,355
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   250,355
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.08
        

</TABLE>
#### Jans Jacobsen Frogner, *Respondent, v.*Dampskibs Selskabet, “Thingvalla” etc., *Appellant.*

Order denying motion to make complaint more definite and certain affirmed, with costs and disbursements. Opinion by

Dykman, J.
§ 1185.5 Common control. It shall not be necessary for any person to secure authorization to hold the position of officer or director of two or more carriers if such carriers are operated under common control or management either: ( a ) Pursuant to approval and authority of the ICC granted under former 49 U.S.C. 11343-44 or by the STB granted under 49 U.S.C. 11323-24; or
( b ) Pursuant to an exemption authorized by the ICC under former 49 U.S.C. 10505 or by the STB under 49 U.S.C. 10502; or
( c ) Pursuant to a controlling, controlled, or common control relationship which has existed between such carriers since before June 16, 1933.
[62 FR 2042, Jan. 15, 1997, as amended at 69 FR 58366, Sept. 30, 2004]
Exhibit 10.15

                         GRAND HAVANA ENTERPRISES, INC.
                       1990 WESTWOOD BOULEVARD, PENTHOUSE
                              LOS ANGELES, CA 90025


                               September 26, 2004


1990 Westwood Boulevard, Inc.
1990 Westwood Boulevard, Third Floor
Los Angeles, California  90025
Attention.: Harry Shuster

Dear Mr. Shuster:

      When   countersigned  by  you  below,  this  letter  will  set  forth  our
understanding and constitute our agreement as to the following:

      As of September 26, 2004, Grand Havana  Enterprises,  Inc. (the "Company")
is indebted to 1990 Westwood Boulevard,  Inc., a California corporation ("1990")
in the total amount of $170,865.58,  which  represents  $166,055.00 in principal
and $4,810.58 in unpaid interest  accrued as of the date hereof,  as a result of
that certain  Promissory  Note,  dated March 1, 2004, in the principal amount of
$181,720 (the  "Outstanding  Promissory  Note").  1990 hereby  acknowledges  and
agrees that the Outstanding  Promissory Note is hereby  cancelled and terminated
effective as of the date hereof, without any further liability or obligations by
the  Company   thereunder  and,  in  consideration  for  such  cancellation  and
termination,  the Company will issue to 1990 a new, unsecured promissory note in
the principal amount of $170,865.58.

      This  letter  agreement  may be executed  in two or more  counterparts  by
original or facsimile  signature,  each of which when so executed will be deemed
to be an original,  and all of which  together will be deemed to constitute  one
and the same agreement.

<PAGE>

      If the  foregoing  is in  accordance  with your  understanding,  please so
indicate by signing where  provided  below and returning one  fully-signed  copy
hereof to us,  whereupon this letter will  constitute an agreement fully binding
on the parties  hereto in accordance  with its terms under the laws of the State
of California.


                                        Very truly yours,


                                        GRAND HAVANA ENTERPRISES, INC.,
                                        a Delaware corporation


                                        By: /s/ Stanley Shuster
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Name:  Stanley Shuster
                                            Title: President


                                        AGREED AND ACCEPTED:


                                        1990 WESTWOOD BOULEVARD, INC.
                                        a California corporation


                                        By: /s/ Harry Shuster
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Name:  Harry Shuster
                                            Title: President


                                       2
#### § 177.810 Vehicular tunnels.

Except as regards Class 7 (radioactive) materials, nothing contained in parts 170-189 of this subchapter shall be so construed as to nullify or supersede regulations established and published under authority of State statute or municipal ordinance regarding the kind, character, or quantity of any hazardous material permitted by such regulations to be transported through any urban vehicular tunnel used for mass transportation.

[Amdt. 177-52, 46 FR 5316, Jan. 19, 1981, as amended by Amdt. 177-78, 55 FR 52710, Dec. 21, 1990; 62 FR 51561, Oct. 1, 1997]
#### § 1104.11 Amendments.

Leave to amend any document is a matter of the Board's discretion.

[47 FR 49554, Nov. 1, 1982, as amended at 61 FR 52711, Oct. 8, 1996]
#### § 176.65 Alternative stowage procedures.

When a hazardous material is to be loaded on board a vessel and it is shown to the satisfaction of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port for the place where the vessel is being loaded that it is impracticable to comply with a stowage location requirement specified in the § 172.101 table of this subchapter or a segregation, handling or stowage requirement specified in this part, the Captain of the Port may authorize in writing the use of an alternative stowage location or method of segregation, handling or stowage subject to such conditions as he finds will insure a level of safety at least equal to that afforded by the regulatory requirement concerned.

[Amdt. 176-30, 55 FR 52689, Dec. 21, 1990]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-4940

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. JOE LEWIS JEFFERSON, a/k/a Stink, a/k/a Louis Jefferson, a/k/a Joe Little, a/k/a Jo Jo, a/k/a Joseph Wayne Jefferson, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (4:07-cr-00023-D-1; 5:07-cr-00197-D)

Submitted: November 23, 2009 Decided: December 10, 2009

Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mark E. Edwards, EDWARDS & TRENKLE, PLLC, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellant. George E. B. Holding, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.PER CURIAM: Following his guilty plea to identity fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(7) (2006), and possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924 (2006), Joe Lewis Jefferson was sentenced to 156 months’ imprisonment on the identity fraud conviction and a concurrent 120 months’ imprisonment on the firearm and ammunition count. Jefferson appeals his sentence, arguing that the district court erred when it imposed a departure sentence that was too extensive. Finding no error, we

affirm. Although Jefferson does not dispute the legal or factual correctness of the district court’s findings at sentencing and does not claim that the district court was unjustified in departing under the relevant guidelines provisions, Jefferson does assert that his sentence is “only 24 months less than the maximum” and that it is excessive in light of his guilty plea, acceptance of responsibility, and efforts to cooperate with authorities. The district court provided ample analysis of the reasons it believed Jefferson’s departure sentence was warranted, not only during Jefferson’s sentencing hearing, but also in a detailed sentencing memorandum. Given the extent of Jefferson’s criminal history, the negligible deterrent effect of his prior more lenient sentences, the

23 increasingly serious and extensive nature of Jefferson’s offenses, and the district co urt’s meaningful articulation of the reasons for its departure and the extent of the departure, we find that the extent of Jefferson’s departure sentence was

reasonable. See Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 50-51 (2007); United States v. Hernandez-Villanueva , 473 F.3d 118, 123 (4th Cir. 2007). Based on the foregoing, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                    5
                                           
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         AUG-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            SEP-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              NOV-30-1998
<CASH>                                            4581
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   384423
<ALLOWANCES>                                     10132
<INVENTORY>                                      52505
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                558612
<PP&E>                                         2842704
<DEPRECIATION>                                  349661
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 4473566
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           435232
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         88381
<OTHER-SE>                                      964339
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   4473566
<SALES>                                         467019
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                467019
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   376843
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               43084
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  47092
<INCOME-TAX>                                     19320
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              27772
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     27772
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.27
        

</TABLE>
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday, June 15, 1995 (80), Para 80.5 Defense Authorization]
[Page 917]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.80.5  defense authorization

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. TORKILDSEN, pursuant to House Resolution 
164 and rule XXIII, declared the House resolved into the Committee of 
the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration 
of the bill (H.R. 1530) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1996 
for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe 
military personnel strengths for fiscal year 1996, and for other 
purposes.
  Mr. EMERSON, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, resumed the 
chair; and after some time spent therein,
```
# EUR-Lex - 52001XC1123(02) - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 52001XC1123(02)

**Notice to importers — Imports from Israel into the Community **

*
Official Journal C 328 , 23/11/2001 P. 0006 - 0006 *

Notice to importers

Imports from Israel into the Community

(2001/C 328/04)

In an earlier Notice to importers published on 8 November 1997 in Official Journal of the European Communities C 338 (page 13), operators were informed that there were grounds for doubts about the validity of EUR.1 movement certificates submitted to the Community for importations of orange juice coming from Israel, that there was a lack of effective administrative cooperation as foreseen in the different preferential agreements signed between the Community and Israel and of the existence of certain substantial errors in the application of the Agreements, to the extent that the validity of all preferential certificates issued by Israel were put in doubt.

Operators are informed that the EUR.1 movement certificates for orange juice, found to be invalid, have been withdrawn by Israel and that the necessary measures have been taken to allow administrative cooperation as foreseen in the Agreements.

As to the substantial errors in the application of the Agreements, operators are informed that arising from the results of the verification procedures carried out, it is now confirmed that Israel issues proofs of origin for products coming from places brought under Israeli administration since 1967, which, according to the Community, are not entitled to benefit from preferential treatment under the Agreements.

Community operators presenting documentary evidence of origin with a view to securing preferential treatment for products originating from Israeli settlements in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, are informed that they must take all the necessary precautions and that putting the goods in free circulation may give rise to a customs debt.

This notice replaces the November 1997 notice from the date of publication.
###### Editorial Note on Part 91

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 91 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59779, Oct. 1, 2012.

#### § 91.35-1 When made.

(a) An inspection of quarters, toilet and washing spaces, serving pantries, galleys, etc., shall be made at least once in every month. If the route of the vessel is such that it is away from a United States port for more than one month, an inspection shall be conducted at least once every trip.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Wilfred J. Corrigan, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of LSI Logic Corporation on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
October 3, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such
Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of LSI Logic Corporation. By: /s/ Wilfred J. CorriganName: Wilfred J. CorriganTitle: Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
13642218v1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

KIMALA PERRY, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiffs, ) Case 2:15-cv-11748 

 ) 

 -vs- ) Honorable Robert H. Cleland 

 ) 

JO ANN STORES LLC, dba ) 

JO ANN FABRIC AND CRAFT, ) Lower Court No. 15-146579-NO 

a foreign corporation, ) 

 ) E-FILE 

 Defendant. ) 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND SCHEDULING 

ORDER DATES 

At a session of Court held in the 

United States District Court 

on April 29, 2016. 

Present: Hon. ROBERT H. CLELAND 

 United States District Court Judge 

 This matter having come before the Court on the stipulation of the 

parties and the Court previously only extended the discovery deadline by 

60 days and this being the parties' first request for adjournment of the 

remaining scheduling order dates and the Court being fully advised in the 

premises: 

 IT IS ORDERED that the current remaining scheduling order dates be 

extended by 60 days as follows to provide the parties with an opportunity to 

2:15-cv-11748-SFC-SDD Doc # 22 Filed 04/29/16 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 261
2

13642218v1

attempt resolution of the case, including potentially, through private 

mediation: 

 Summary Disposition Motions from March 11, 2016 to 

May 10, 2016 

 Trial Documents due by June 27, 2016 

 Final Pretrial Conference from May 2, 2016 to July 5, 2016 at 

2:00 p.m. 

 Trial Date from May 16, 2016 to a date "TO BE DETERMINED BY 

THE COURT"1

Dated April 29, 2016 

 s/Robert H. Cleland 

 United States District Court Judge 

 

1

 Defense counsel notified the court that she has a trial conflict with the extended 60 day trial date of July 

15, 2016. Per the case management clerk, the court will review its calendar and confirm a new trial date 

that is convenient for the court and the parties. 

2:15-cv-11748-SFC-SDD Doc # 22 Filed 04/29/16 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 262
<PAGE>   1



                    EXHIBIT 11- STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF
                               PER SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                   For The Three Months Ended     For The Nine Months Ended
                                                         September 30,                  September 30,
                                                   --------------------------     -------------------------
                                                       1996            1995           1996            1995
<S>                                                <C>             <C>           <C>              <C>
Net Income                                         $16,548,708     $15,130,361    $46,276,085     $39,657,072

Net Income per Share                               $      0.53     $      0.46    $      1.48     $      1.20

Weighted Number of Shares Outstanding               30,974,994      33,107,380     31,262,294      33,100,867
</TABLE>





                                          



See condensed notes to consolidated financial statements.
Exhibit 32.2





Section 1350 Certification





In connection with the Annual Report of Inuvo, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Wallace D. Ruiz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350, as adopted pursuant to SS. 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, as amended, and





2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditions and results of operations of the Company.





Date:  April 3, 2014





/s/ Wallace D. Ruiz


Wallace D. Ruiz


Chief Financial Officer, principal financial and accounting 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 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.
98-2549.

#### State ex rel. Lucas Cty. *Bd. of Commrs.*v. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.

In Mandamus. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of mandamus. Upon consideration of the motion for leave to intervene of Envirosafe Services of Ohio, Inc.,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for leave to intervene be, and hereby is, granted.
§ 172.313 Poisonous hazardous materials. In addition to any other markings required by this subpart: ( a ) A material poisonous by inhalation (see § 171.8 of this subchapter) shall be marked “Inhalation Hazard” in association with the required labels or placards, as appropriate, and shipping name when required. The marking must be on two opposing sides of a bulk packaging. (See § 172.302(b) of this subpart for size of markings on bulk packages.) When the words “Inhalation Hazard” appear on the label, as prescribed in §§ 172.416 and 172.429, or placard, as prescribed in §§ 172.540 and 172.555, the “Inhalation Hazard” marking is not required on the package.
( b ) Each non-bulk plastic outer packaging used as a single or composite packaging for materials meeting the definition of Division 6.1 (in § 173.132 of this subchapter) shall be permanently marked, by embossment or other durable means, with the word “POISON” in letters at least 6.3 mm (0.25 inch) in height. Additional text or symbols related to hazard warning may be included in the marking. The marking shall be located within 150 mm (6 inches) of the closure of the packaging.
( c ) A transport vehicle or freight container containing a material poisonous by inhalation in non-bulk packages shall be marked, on each side and each end as specified in § 172.332 or § 172.336, with the identification number specified for the hazardous material in the § 172.101 table, subject to the following provisions and limitations: ( 1 ) The material is in Hazard Zone A or B;
( 2 ) The transport vehicle or freight container is loaded at one facility with 1,000 kg (2,205 pounds) or more aggregate gross weight of the material in non-bulk packages marked with the same proper shipping name and identification number; and
( 3 ) If the transport vehicle or freight container contains more than one material meeting the provisions of this paragraph (c), it shall be marked with the identification number for one material, determined as follows: ( i ) For different materials in the same hazard zone, with the identification number of the material having the greatest aggregate gross weight; and
( ii ) For different materials in both Hazard Zones A and B, with the identification number for the Hazard Zone A material.
( d ) For a packaging containing a Division 6.1 PG III material, “PG III” may be marked adjacent to the POISON label. (See § 172.405(c).)
[Amdt. 172-123, 55 FR 52592, Dec. 21, 1990, as amended at 57 FR 46624, Oct. 9, 1992; Amdt. 172-151, 62 FR 1228, Jan. 8, 1997; 62 FR 39398, 39405, July 22, 1997; 63 FR 16075, Apr. 1, 1998; 64 FR 10776, Mar. 5, 1999]