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

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
consolidated  balance  sheets and  consolidated  statement of  operations of the
Company and the notes thereto set forth in the Prospectus.  This  information is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial information.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001052914
<NAME>                        European Micro Holdings, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                                            <C>                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS              9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1999        JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000        JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000        MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         3,107              3,547
<SECURITIES>                                   0                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  10,028             15,017
<ALLOWANCES>                                   94                 79
<INVENTORY>                                    7,820              7,232
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               21,814             27,809
<PP&E>                                         4,771              1410
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,052              798
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 28,774             30,599
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          13,583             15,965
<BONDS>                                        1,735              23
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0                  0
<PREFERRED>                                    0                  0
<COMMON>                                       49                 49
<OTHER-SE>                                     13,407             14,294
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   28,774             30,599
<SALES>                                        24,354             91,663
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               24,354             91,663
<CGS>                                          22,499             82,406
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  3,323              9,747
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               7                  45
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             148                676
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,609)            (1,099)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (301)              (9)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,308)            (1,090)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0                  0
<CHANGES>                                      0                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,308)            (1,090)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.26)             (0.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.26)             (0.22)



</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Thomas E. Mills, certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of AMP Productions,
Ltd.;

2.     Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.     I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
registrant and I have:

a)     designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b)     evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c)     presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

5.     I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

a)     all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b)     any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls.

6.     I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent evaluation, including
any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses.

February 13, 2007


By /s/ Thomas Mills
Thomas E. Mills
President & Chief Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

ERICA FLEAGLE LEACH,

Respondent

v.

PEGGY A. DAVIS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 184 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 28th day of August, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
<PAGE>



                               REPORTS ON FORM 8-K

         The Company filed a report on Form 8-K dated December 19, 1995
disclosing the purchase of the assets of Pixie Playmates, Inc. Certified Sewing
Services, Inc. and all of the capital stock of Certified Apparel Services of
Honduras, Inc., CA. No reports on Form 8-K were filed during the last quarter of
the period covered by this report.

                                  EXHIBIT (11)

              Statement Regarding Computation of Per Share Earnings
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                    
                                                                                    Weighted Average
                                Weighted Average            Weighted Average        Common and Common
                                Number of Common           Number of Dilutive        Stock Equivalent
                                Shares Outstanding         Common Stock Options            Shares
                                ------------------         --------------------     -----------------
<S>                             <C>                        <C>                       <C>
November 27, 1993                3,250,000                  319,000                  3,472,000
December 3, 1994                 3,346,000                  356,000                  3,569,000
December 2, 1995                 3,331,000                  419,000                  3,750,000
  
</TABLE>
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JESSE WASHINGTON, No. 2:04-cv-1317-MCE-GGH-P

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER

J. FANNON, ET AL., 

Defendants.

 /

On May 24, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued an Order

granting Defendants an extension of time to take Plaintiff’s

deposition. On July 3, 2006, Plaintiff filed a Request for

Reconsideration of that Order. Local Rule 72-303(b), states

“rulings by Magistrate Judges shall be final if no

reconsideration thereof is sought from the Court within ten court

days . . . from the date of service of the ruling on the

parties.” E.D. Local Rule 72-303(b). Plaintiff’s request for

reconsideration of the magistrate judge’s Order of May 24, 2006

is therefore untimely.

Case 2:04-cv-01317-MCE -GGH Document 68 Filed 07/14/06 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s July 3,

2006 Request for Reconsideration is denied.

DATED: July 13, 2006

_________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01317-MCE -GGH Document 68 Filed 07/14/06 Page 2 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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARVELLOUS A. GREENE, SR.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1983 FCD KJM P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 together with a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915. However, the certificate portion of the request which must be completed by

plaintiff’s institution of incarceration has not been filled out. Also, plaintiff has not filed a

certified copy of his prison trust account statement for the six month period immediately

preceding the filing of the complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). Plaintiff will be provided the

opportunity to submit a completed in forma pauperis application and a certified copy in support

of his application.

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01983-FCD-KJM Document 4 Filed 04/25/05 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

2

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, a 

completed affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis on the form provided

by the Clerk of Court; 

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a new Application to

Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner; and

3. Plaintiff shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, a certified

copy of his prison trust account statement for the six month period immediately preceding the

filing of the complaint. Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order will result in a

recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

DATED: April 22, 2005.

1/kf

gree041983.3c+n 

Case 2:04-cv-01983-FCD-KJM Document 4 Filed 04/25/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 52605.

protest 131793-K (San Francisco).

#### Raphael Weill & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It appeared that the goods were subject to the British purchase tax and on entry a duress certificate was filed in which the importer certified that it had entered the merchandise at a value higher than that defined in the tariff act because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases then pending on appeal for reappraisement. The collector disregarded said certificate and liquidated upon the entered value on the ground that the certificate was not signed, the signature being in typewriting. Under authority of *Clinton Smullyan Associates*v. *United States*(35 C. C. P. A. 7, C. A. D. 363) the court sustained the elaim that the liquidation should have been made upon the basis of the value found by the court on appeal to reappraisement (Reap. Dec. 6478), in which it was held that the British purchase tax was no part of the entered value.
No. 58986.

protests144932-K/1910, etc. (Chicago).

#### Mallars & Company et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of Pecorino (sheep’s milk) cheese similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Fontana Hollywood Corp.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 98, C. D. 1503) and *Lekas & Drivas, Inc.*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 242, C. D. 1660), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 56436.

protests 173498-K and 177901-K (New York).

#### Chilewich Sons & Co. and Emil Buschhoff & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of certain snakeskins similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Fleming-Joffe, Ltd.*v. *United States*(25 Cust. Ct. 56, C. D. 1263), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1765 was sustained.
No. 58030.

protests 164033-K, etc. (New York).

#### Kwan Lee Co., Inc., and W. J. Byrnes *&*Co. of N. Y., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of silent butlers, smoothing irons, and trays the same in all material respects as those involved in *Ignaz Strauss & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 342, C. D. 710), *The Fan Co.*v. *United States*(25 Cust. Ct. 42, C. D. 1261), and *Ignaz Strauss & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(28 Cust. Ct. 280, C. D. 1423), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
|                                            |
|--------------------------------------------|
|                                            |  |  |  |
|                                       | Jurisdiction of Incorporation |   | Percent of Voting Stock Owned By the Registrant |
| Kimball International Marketing, Inc.      | Indiana |   | 100% |
| Kimball Furniture Group, Inc.              | Indiana |   | 100% |
| Kimball Electronics, Inc.                  | Indiana |   | 100% |
| Kimball International Transit, Inc.        | Indiana |   | 100% |
| Kimball Electronics - Mexico, S.A. de C.V. | Mexico |   | 100% |
| Kimball Electronics (Thailand) Limited     | Thailand |   | 100% |
| Kimball Electronics Poland Sp. z o.o.      | Poland |   | 100% |
| Kimball Hospitality, Inc.                  | Indiana |   | 100% |
| Kimball Electronics (Wales) Limited        | United Kingdom |   | 100% |
| Kimball Electronics (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.    | China |   | 100% |
| Kimball Electronics Tampa, Inc.            | Florida |   | 100% |
| National Office Furniture, Inc.            | Delaware |   | 100% |
| Kimball Electronics Netherlands B.V.       | Netherlands |   | 100% |
| Kimball Electronics - Mexico, Inc.         | Texas |   | 100% |
No. 58533.

protests 200234-K, etc. (New York).

#### Browne Vintners Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 130, C. A. D. 508) and *Austin Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
| U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 2203-A |
|----------------------------------------|

| **Qingshankou-Putaohua/Shaertu and Jurassic        Coal–Denglouku/Nongan Total Petroleum Systems in the Songliao Basin,        China** |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| ***By*****Robert T. Ryder, Jin Qiang, Peter J. McCabe, Vito F. Nuccio, *and* Felix Persits** |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

| **Version 1.0** |
|-----------------|

----

| The text of this report is presented here in Portable Document Format. The  latest version of Adobe Acrobat Reader® or similar software is required  to view it. If you wish to download the latest version of Acrobat Reader® freeof charge, click here. |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| **This report consists of several linked PDF files.  To use this report effectively, you must have access to all these files.  Provided are options to view online or download the contents to your hard drive.** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| View report online                                                                                                                                                                                                |
| Bulletin PDF file (1.68 MB)                                                                                                                                                                                       | (This version of the report is accessible as defined in Section 508.) |

 

| Download entire contents |
|--------------------------|
| B2203-A.tar.gz           | TAR GZIPPED archive file (3.16 MB) |
| B2203-A.zip              | ZIPPED archive file (3.16 MB) |
| View downloads directory |

----

| AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices                                                                                                                                                         |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey      URL: https://pubsdata.usgs.gov/pubs/bul/b2203-a/Questions or Assistance: USGS Web ContactPage Last Modified: Wed Nov 23 11:20 EDT 2016 |  |

----
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74

38 40 42



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 06/21 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 21 Jun 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.92 N 77.01 WMeters AGL
1... This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2007-CI-06291, American Technology Marketing, Inc. v. B & D

Management Co., Inc. d/b/a McDonald’s Restaurant, Didak, Inc. d/b/a McDonald’s Restaurant, and PICI Management,

Inc. d/b/a McDonald’s Restaurant, and P&M Hoskins Enterprises, LLC d/b/a McDonald’s Restaurant, pending in the

407th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Peter Sakai presiding.

i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-09-00336-CV

IN RE AMERICAN TECHNOLOGY MARKETING, INC.

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 29, 2009

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

The court has considered the petition for a writ of mandamus filed by relator, American

Technology Marketing, Inc., and the response of the real party in interest and is of the opinion that

relief should be denied. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). Accordingly, relator’s petition for a writ of

mandamus is denied. 

Relator shall pay all costs incurred in this proceeding.

The clerk of this court is directed to transmit a copy of this opinion to the attorneys of record,

the trial court judge, and the trial court clerk.

PER CURIAM
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TONY HARRIS, No. CIV S-04-1149-WBS-CMK

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER

CHICO NISSAN, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff filed this action alleging discrimination in violation of the Americans with

Disabilities Act and California law. Currently before the court is plaintiff’s September 21, 2005,

document entitled “Plaintiff’s First Amended Notice of Motion and Motion to Compel

Discovery,” (Doc. 25) which was originally noticed for hearing on October 11, 2005, at 10:00

a.m. in Redding, California. By order issued on October 6, 2005, that hearing was vacated from

the court’s calendar, plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions was denied, and defendants were

directed to show cause in writing why sanctions should not issue for failure to respond to

discovery requests. Defendants have responded to the court’s order and plaintiff’s September 21,

2005, motion now stands submitted on the papers, except as otherwise denied in the October 6,

2005, order. 

Case 2:04-cv-01149-DFL-CMK Document 56 Filed 10/28/05 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

2

In his motion to compel, plaintiff asserts that defendants Chico Nissan and

Raymond L. Bowen have failed to respond to his request for production of documents. Plaintiff

also asserts that Raymond L. Bowen and Brian Bowen have failed to appear at properly noticed

depositions. Plaintiff seeks an order: (1) directing defendants Chico Nissan and Raymond L.

Bowen to produce the documents sought; (2) directing Raymond L. Bowen and Brian Bowen to

appear at their depositions; and (3) awarding monetary sanctions. As indicated above, plaintiff’s

request for monetary sanctions was denied on October 6, 2005. Moreover, the record reflects that

the parties reached a stipulation concerning depositions. That stipulation was approved by the

court by order dated October 19, 2005. Therefore, the only issue before the court is defendants’

alleged non-response to document requests. 

In their response to the court’s order to show cause, defendants state that “. . . all

additional responsive documents were already provided to Plaintiff prior to the parties entering

into [the deposition] stipulation.” Upon review of plaintiff’s September 21, 2005, motion, it

appears that the documents sought by that motion relate to the depositions which are the subject

of the parties’ stipulation. Given defendants’ representation that all documents plaintiff has

requested have been produced, plaintiff’s motion will be denied. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The court’s October 6, 2005, order to show cause directed at defendants is

discharged; and

2. Plaintiff’s September 21, 2005, motion to compel is denied in its entirety. 

DATED: October 27, 2005.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01149-DFL-CMK Document 56 Filed 10/28/05 Page 2 of 2
Before the First Division,

July 3, 1943

No. 48505.

#### Protests 74197-K, etc., of Butler Bros. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.