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

<ARTICLE>                              5
<MULTIPLIER>                           1,000
<CURRENCY>                             U. S. Dollars
       
<S>                                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                               JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                      1
<CASH>                                                           3,078
<SECURITIES>                                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                   27,797
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     1,008
<INVENTORY>                                                     21,902
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                72,793
<PP&E>                                                         156,385
<DEPRECIATION>                                                  94,685
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 157,990
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                           30,886
<BONDS>                                                         32,959
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                0
<PREFERRED>                                                         19
<COMMON>                                                           114
<OTHER-SE>                                                      86,316
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   157,990
<SALES>                                                         26,563
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                98,764
<CGS>                                                           17,496
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                   62,574
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    21
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                               1,552
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                  3,246
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     1,333
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                              1,913
<DISCONTINUED>                                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                      0
<CHANGES>                                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                                     1,913
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                        0.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                        0.18
        


</TABLE>
No. 60520.

#### Morganite, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 283683-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of carbon powder similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Morganite, Inc.*v. *United States*(42 C. C. P. A. 207, C. A. D. 595), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 11.1


                   SOFTWARE SPECTRUM, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
              COMPUTATION OF PRIMARY EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE
                                  (Unaudited)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                               Three Months Ended                       Six Months Ended
                                         -------------------------------       ----------------------------------
                                         October 31,       September 30,        October 31,         September 30,
                                            1997                1996               1997                 1996
                                         -----------       -------------       -------------        -------------

<S>                                      <C>               <C>                 <C>                  <C>
Net income (loss)                        $   628,000       $    (533,000)      $   1,169,000        $   (789,000)
                                         ===========       =============       =============        ============

Shares as adjusted:
  Average number of shares
    outstanding                            4,331,338           4,288,277           4,331,810           4,275,903
Incremental shares
    from outstanding stock
    options as determined
    under the treasury stock
    method, using the
    average market price                      56,693                  -- (*)          32,728                  -- (*)
                                         -----------       -------------       -------------        ------------

Shares as adjusted                         4,388,031           4,288,277           4,364,538           4,275,903
                                         ===========       =============       =============        ============

Primary earnings (loss) per share        $      0.14       $       (0.12)      $        0.27        $      (0.18)
                                         ===========       =============       =============        ============
</TABLE>



(*) No incremental shares from outstanding stock options are included, as they
    would be anti-dilutive.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 189 (Monday, October 2, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 67785]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21596]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Human Genome Research Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Board of Scientific 
Counselors, National Human Genome Research Institute.
    The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below in 
accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended for the review, discussion, and evaluation of 
individual intramural programs and projects conducted by the National 
Human Genome Research Institute, including consideration of personnel 
qualifications and performance, and the competence of individual 
investigators, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Counselors, National 
Human Genome Research Institute.
    Date: November 28-29, 2023.
    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate personnel qualifications and 
performance, and competence of individual investigators
    Place: National Human Genome Research Institute, National 
Institutes of Health, Building 50, Room 5222C, Bethesda, MD 20892 
(Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Paul Liu, Ph.D., MD, Deputy Scientific Director, 
National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes of 
Health, Building 50, Room 5222C, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 402-2529, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#daaab6b3af9ab7bbb3b6f4b4b3b2f4bdb5ac"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6515090c102508040c094b0b0c0d4b020a13">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.172, Human 
Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 26, 2023.
Melanie J. Pantoja,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-21596 Filed 9-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel R24 Review.                    

*Date:*                         November 27, 2023.                    

*Time:*                         1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Greg Bissonette, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institute of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room Hoteling, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, 301-827-5118,                         *bissonettegb@mail.nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: September 27, 2023.

Miguelina Perez, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2023-21769 Filed 10-2-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
No. 63353.

protest 59/7723 (New York).

#### Pollak Industrial Corp. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of straw hats similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Pollak Industrial Corp. et al.*v. *United States*(40 Cust. Ct. 251, C.D. 1991), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Case 2:05-cv-01669-JCC Document 23 Filed 03/30/06 Page 1 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-01669-JCC Document 23 Filed 03/30/06 Page 2 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-01669-JCC Document 23 Filed 03/30/06 Page 3 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-01669-JCC Document 23 Filed 03/30/06 Page 4 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-01669-JCC Document 23 Filed 03/30/06 Page 5 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-01669-JCC Document 23 Filed 03/30/06 Page 6 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-01669-JCC Document 23 Filed 03/30/06 Page 7 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-01669-JCC Document 23 Filed 03/30/06 Page 8 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-01669-JCC Document 23 Filed 03/30/06 Page 9 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-01669-JCC Document 23 Filed 03/30/06 Page 10 of 11
Case 2:05-cv-01669-JCC Document 23 Filed 03/30/06 Page 11 of 11
Jeffrey M. Harper RECEI\/ D 

FAA Office of Regional Counsel 

1601 Lind Avenue Southwest 

Renton, Washington 98057 

T (425) 227·2161 

F (425) 227-1007 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

JUL 2 7 2015 

HEARING DOC 

In the Matter of: 

FAA Case No. 2011NM060072 

DMS No. FAA-2012-0869 

Sky West Airlines, Inc. 

Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

NOTICE OF APPEAL 

In accordance with 14 C.F.R. § 13.233(a), Complainant hereby submits Notice ofhis 

intent to appeal the Initial Decision of Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin, 

served July 16,2015. 

Respectfully submitted this 22"d day of July, 2015. 

iftM. Harper 

'1:< AA Attorney 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Notice of Appeal has been served via facsimile, 

electronic mail and Certified Mail- Return Receipt Requested this date, to the following: 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

F (202) 366-7536 

E Richard.goodwin@dot.gov 

Todd Emerson, Esq. 

Sky West Airlines, Inc. 

444 South River Road 

St. George, UT 84 790 

F (435) 634-3505 

E temerson@skywest.com 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Notice of Appeal has been served via facsimile, and 

Certified Mail- Return Receipt Requested this date, to the following: 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl 000 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

F (202) 267-1293 

Dated this 22nd day ofJuly, 2015. 

Notice of Appeal 

In the Matter of SkyWest Airlines, Inc. 

/·•' 

l i<jC.lr':/i ·:_. t ,·;.-- }J_//~;:.':>/((,.)_/"i)( .. Dana Stephenson I 

Office ofRegional Counsel (ANM-7) 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Ave. SW 

Renton, W A 98057 

( 425) 227-2007 

FAA Case No. 2011NM060072, DMS No. FAA-2012-0869 

Page 2 of2 

Jeffrey M. Harper, FAA Attorney 

T (425) 227-2161 

F (425) 227-1007
From: jhewett@stny.rr.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:34:57 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Judith Hewett

Laurens, NY 13796
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

VINCENT DANIEL HOPPER,

Plaintiff,

v.

G. WIGEN, et al,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5662FDB

ORDER GRANTING

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS AND

DIRECTING INSTITUTION TO

CALCULATE, COLLECT, AND

FORWARD PAYMENTS

The Court, having reviewed plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis, does hereby find

and ORDER. 

Plaintiff’s declaration indicates he is unable to afford the court’s filing fee or give security therefor. 

Accordingly, plaintiff’s application to proceed as a pauper is GRANTED. As set forth below, an initial

partial filing fee will be collected, and plaintiff is required to make monthly payments of 20 percent

of the preceding months income credited to his/her account until the full amount of the filing fee is

satisfied.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and plaintiff’s approved application to proceed in forma pauperis,

the agency having custody of the above named plaintiff is directed to calculate an initial partial filing fee

equal to 20 percent of greater of -- the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account or the average

monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the 6-month period immediately preceding the date of this

Order. The initial partial filing fee should be forwarded to the court clerk as soon as practicable.

Subsequently, if the prisoner’s account exceeds $10.00, each month the agency having custody of

the above named plaintiff is directed to collect and forward to the Clerk of the United States District

Case 3:05-cv-05662-FDB Document 11 Filed 01/12/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 2

Court, Western District of Washington, 1717 Pacific Avenue, Room 3100, Tacoma, WA 98402, payments

equal to 20 percent of the prisoner’s preceding month’s income credited to the prisoner’s account. In the

event that the monthly payment would reduce the prisoner’s account below $10.00, the agency should

collect and forward only that amount which would reduce the prisoner’s account to the $10.00 level. 

Please note that this $10.00 limit does not apply to the initial partial filing fee described above. Finally, the

monthly payments should be collected and forwarded to the court until the entire filing fee ($250.00) for

this matter has been paid. 

The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff a copy of this Order and the General Order, and a copy of

this Order along with a copy of plaintiff’s Acknowledgement and Authorization portion of the IFP

application to the attention of the inmate account manager (IFP account manager at the Northwest

Detention Center).

DATED this 12th day of January, 2006.

A

Karen L. Strombom

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-05662-FDB Document 11 Filed 01/12/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 61061.

protests 289445-K etc. (New York).

#### Airport Clearance Service *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

An examination of the official papers failing to disclose any reason for disturbing- the presumptively correct classification made by the collector, the protests were overruled:
No. P67/103.

#### Dumont Handkerchief, Inc., et al. *v.*United States

protests 65/14571, etc. (New York).

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by'the foregoing protests consists of silk handkerchiefs similar in all material respects to those the subjéct of *Ashear, Bros., Inc.*v. *United States*(55 Cust. Ct. 238, C.D. 2582), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

No. 83615 FREDERICK OMOYUMA SILVER, Appellant, vs. CANDICE KATIE TOWNER, Respondent. 

# FILED

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

This is a pro se appeal from an order denying appellant's "objection" to a postjudgment order that denied appellant's motion for a birth certificate, motion to disestablish paternity, motion to modify child custody and support, and motion for the return of federal stimulus money. Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Court Division, Clark County; T. Arthur Ritchie, Jr., Judge.

The order designated in the notice of appeal is not substantively appealable. See NRAP 3A(b). This court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule. Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels, 100 Nev. 207, 678 P.2d 1152 (1984). No statute or court rule provides for an appeal from an order denying an objection to an order. To the extent the order denies a motion for reconsideration or rehearing, such orders are not independently appealable. Alvis v. State, 

# 2 - 3o g IPickering

Gaming Control Bd., 99 Nev. 184, 660 P.2d 980 (1983) (holding that an order denying a motion for rehearing is not appealable), overruled on other grounds by AA Primo Builders, LLC v. Washington, 126 Nev. 578, 245 P.3d 1190 (2010). This court lacks jurisdiction and

ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.

J. Cadish

Herndon

cc: Hon. T. Arthur Ritchie, Jr., District Judge, Family Court Division Frederick Omoyuma Silver Candice Katie Towner Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT' OF NEWOA
(01 1447A ot4V,.4. 2
From: Jacob.Pawson@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:48:54 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Jacob Pawson

Tucson, AZ 85712