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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE DECEMBER
31, 1997  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                        0000907245                        
<NAME>                                       DUAL HOLDING COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000

       
<S>                                           <C> 
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                  DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                             10,071
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      12,515
<ALLOWANCES>                                          407
<INVENTORY>                                           440
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   31,188
<PP&E>                                            326,670
<DEPRECIATION>                                     32,923
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    435,459
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              28,765
<BONDS>                                            98,762
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                                0
<OTHER-SE>                                        278,897
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      435,459
<SALES>                                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   90,854
<CGS>                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      35,411
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   32,682
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 11,911
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    11,950
<INCOME-TAX>                                        1,941
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                10,009
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                       10,009
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           0
        


</TABLE>
# L_2005072EN.01001301.xml

| 18.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 72/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 72/13

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 441/2005

of 17 March 2005

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of barley issued in Regulation (EC) No 1757/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of barley to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1757/2004 (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of barley to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1757/2004 (2).

| (2) | Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

| (3) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 11 to 17 March 2005 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of barley issued in Regulation (EC) No 1757/2004.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 18 March 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 17 March 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 313, 12.10.2004, p. 10.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7. Regulation as last modified by Regulation (EC) No 777/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 50).

3

---
A

JS Department 290 Seven:
ot Transportation wasnington
Federal Highway February 19, 1997

Administration

Refer to: HNG-14

Dr. Dean L. Sicking

Director, Midwest Roadside
Safety Facility

University of Nebraska Lincoln

W348 Nebraska Hall

Lincoln, Nebraska 68588-0531

Dear Dr. Sicking:

Your December 20, 1996, letter to Mr. Gerald L. Eller requested
the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) acceptance of the use
of 1830-mm long CRT posts as an alternative to the 1780-mm CRT
posts in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program
(NCHRP) Report 350 BEST guardrail terminal which was deemed
acceptable for use on the National Highway System in Mr. Seppo I.
Sillan's November 20, 1996, letter to you. Based on a verbal
request from my staff for more information regarding this change,
you sent a second letter to Mr. Eller on January 20.

In this second letter, you stated that you had run a passing
strength test (a 2000-kg pickup truck at 100 km/h and 20 degrees)
at post number three into a system very similar to the BEST that
used 1830-mm long CRT posts at posts 3-7. Our review of the
original NCHRP Report 350 certification tests revealed that,

in addition to using shorter posts, rough-sawn posts (150 mm x
200 mm) were used in the final design in lieu of the 1830-mm
long, surfaced (S4S) posts with 140 mm x 190 mm dimensions used
in an earlier failing version.

We concur with your conclusion that the increased cross section
(section modulus increase of approximately 28 percent) was far
more influential in successful performance of the acceptable
design than was the 50 mm (4.6 percent, assuming a 550-mm center
of rail mounting height) reduction in embedment depth that
resulted from using 1780-mm posts. Therefore, we agree that the
BEST may be installed with 1780-mm or 1830-mm CRT posts at posts
3-7, provided that in either case, full dimensioned posts, i.e.,
150 mm x 200 mm in cross section, are used. (This same condition
will be applied to the CRT posts in the ET-2000 guardrail
terminal.)


An unrelated concern that we want to address pertains to the
layout designs for the ET-2000 and the BEST observed throughout
the country in recent months. Since both the ET-2000 and the
BEST extruder/cutter heads are wider than the w-beam rail, the
leading edge of these units is significantly closer to the
roadway than the barrier itself. Such placement can lead to an
increase in accidents, particularly if the head encroaches onto a
shoulder area or is within the recommended shy-line distance for
a particular roadway. To minimize accidents and maintenance
costs, both of these terminals should be installed with a 50:1
flare over the first 15 m (50 feet).

Copies of this letter will be sent to the FHWA field offices.

Sincerely yours,

Aesaght 6 arcs
Dwight A. Horne, Chief
Federal-Aid and Design Division

Federal Highway Administration

HNG-14: RPowers: 366-1320:2/18/97:Sicking
copies to:

HNG-1 HNG-10 HNG-14 Reader, 3128 File 3128
Ras HFL-1 HHS-10 HRS-20 HNG-20

Geometric and Safety Design Group Supplement A to Acceptance
Letter CC-37, dated November 20, 1996, and erroneously identified

as CC-36. (Please make pen and ink correction).
#### Classie Lee STEVENSON v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 50055.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Nov. 30, 1977.

Ellis J. Farris, John B. Gee, Vicksburg, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Catherine W. Underwood, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Warren County; Ben Guider, Judge.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., and ROBERTSON and SUGG, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
#### Richard Calvin BROWN, Appellant, v. FLORIDA FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. GG-155.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 23, 1977.

James P. Judkins, Davis & Judkins, Tallahassee, for appellant.

E. Harper Field, Keen, O’Kelley & Spitz, Tallahassee, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. *Summers v. Jackson,*307 So.2d 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975) and *Government Employees Insurance Co. v. Butt,*296 So.2d 599 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974). The motion for attorney’s fees is Denied.

RAWLS, Acting C. J., and SMITH and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
# L_2005171DE.01003101.xml

| 2.7.2005 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 171/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.7.2005

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 171/31

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 874/2005 der Kommission vom 9. Juni 2005 zur Änderung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 872/2004 des Rates über weitere restriktive Maßnahmen gegen Liberia

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 146 vom 10. Juni 2005
  )

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 146 vom 10. Juni 2005

Seite 6, Punkt 13:

anstatt:

„c) Kouenhoven“,

muss es heißen:

„c) Kouenhaven“.

---
#### Ex parte George T. CLARK.

77-407.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

April 28, 1978.

JONES, Justice.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C. J., and MADDOX, SHORES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.
Tribal Transportation Program 

Transportation Improvement Program

2023

Tribal Transporation Program 

Transportation Improvement Program

State of

This report includes all construction projects on current approved Tribal TIPs in this State.

Mississippi

1
Indian Reservation Roads Programs

Federal Lands Highway REPORT FILTERS:

 Location = S-**-***

 program_class_code = 6HI

 CSTIP Type = TIP

Any level TIP/EIP Report

Reporting each CSTIP that meets the filter.

 515,764 0 0 0 0 515,764

 515,764 0 0 0 0 515,764

 515,764

 515,764 0 0 0 0 515,764

S7878304

 515,764 0 0 0 515,764

PE

CONS

CE

Z

 75,000

 440,764

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 75,000

 440,764

 0

 0

Rte 2210 Solomon Drive

Phase Total

 515,764 0 0 0

CRRSAA

R

7

State 28 - Mississippi

S78980 - Mississippi Band (Choctaw )

099 - Neshoba

Name

County

Project Type

Work Type

PCAS

Class

Location Covers that part of the reservation within the current state.

Projects on the CSTIP withn this state are listed and subtotaled in this section

Location Subtotal

State Subtotal

CSTIP Subtotal

Report Total

Program Class Code 6HI

CSTIP Type TIP Fiscal Year 2023

Funding Amount 515,764

FIRST PAGE FOR CSTIP

Entity Name S78980 - MISSISSIPPI BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

Total 0

FY 2023 ($) FY 2024 ($) FY 2025 ($) FY 2026 ($) FY 2027 ($)

FHWA Approved Date 23-JAN-23

2
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20549

 

FORM N-CSRS

 

Investment Company Act file number  811-5896

 

DWS Target Fund

 (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

 

222 South Riverside Plaza

Chicago, IL  60606

(Address of principal executive offices)             (Zip code)

 

Registrant’s Telephone Number, including Area Code: (212) 454-7190

 

Paul Schubert

345 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10154

(Name and Address of Agent for Service)

 

| Date of fiscal year end: | 7/31 |
|--------------------------|------|

 

| Date of reporting period: | 01/31/08 |
|---------------------------|----------|

 

 

**ITEM 1.**           **REPORT TO STOCKHOLDERS**

 

 

JANUARY 31, 2008

Semiannual Report
Exhibit 32.2

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906

of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Shurgard Storage Centers, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-K), I, Devasis Ghose, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C §1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(1) |  | Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
|--- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) |  | The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                  
|------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: March 20, 2006                                             
|                                                                  
|/S/ DEVASIS GHOSE                                                 
|Devasis Ghose Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

July 29, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
135952 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 135952 COA: 280852 Monroe CC: 04-033590-FC RENODDA DARR ELL HICKS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 24, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

s0721 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 29, 2008

Clerk
# L_2005121EN.01008401.xml

| 13.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 121/84 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 121/84

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 727/2005

of 12 May 2005

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of barley issued in Regulation (EC) No 1757/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of barley to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1757/2004 (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of barley to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1757/2004 (2).

| (2) | Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

| (3) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 6 to 12 May 2005 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of barley issued in Regulation (EC) No 1757/2004.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 13 May 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 12 May 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 313, 12.10.2004, p. 10.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7. Regulation as last modified by Regulation (EC) No 777/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 50).

3

---
#### Paul Daniel LEWIS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-696.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 7, 1970.

Hughlan Long, Public Defender, and Alan S. Becker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Ronald W. Sabo, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Stovall v. Denno, 388 U.S. 293, 87 S.Ct. 1967, 18 L.Ed.2d 1199 (1967); Avis v. State, Fla.App.1969, 221 So.2d 235; Anderson v. State, Fla.App. 1968, 215 So.2d 618; Bailey v. State, Fla. App.1967, 199 So.2d 726; and 28 Fla.Jur. Robbery § 5.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

** **

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8Nos. 333-144254, 333-144253, 333-144252, 333-85412, 333-85418, and 333-85420)pertaining to the Directors’ Stock Option Plan, Executive Long-Term StockIncentive Plan, and Employee Stock Option Plan of Monarch Casino &Resort, Inc. of our reports dated March 12, 2009, with respect to theconsolidated financial statements and schedule of Monarch Casino &Resort, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting ofMonarch Casino & Resort, included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K)for the year ended December 31, 2008.

 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

 

LasVegas, NV

March 12,2009

 

----
#### The PALM BEACH COUNTY ZONING COMMISSION, a division of the County of Palm Beach, Florida, and L. Gardner Stratton, Jr., its Chairman, William F. Koch, Jr., Roy E. George, Robert P. Levinson, and Robert C. Lee, as its members, and James C. Watson, as Director of Planning, Zoning, and Building of Palm Beach County, Florida, Appellants, v. E. C. JUSTI, Appellee. The PALM BEACH COUNTY ZONING COMMISSION, L. Gardner Stratton, Jr., William F. Koch, Jr., Roy E. George, Robert P. Levinson, and Robert C. Lee, as its members and James C. Watson, as Director of Planning, Appellants, v. Edmund C. BYRNE and Clyde Gill, Appellees.

Nos. 70-664, 70-875.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 14, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 6, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 99.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of TDK Mediactive, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Martin G. Paravato, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



|                                          
|------------------------------------------
|/s/    MARTIN G. PARAVATO                 
|Martin G. Paravato Chief Financial Officer



June
26, 2003
U.S. Department 

Of Transportation 

Federal Highway 

Administration

400 Seventh St., S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

June 17, 1994 

Refer to: HNG-14/SS-46 

Mr. Vincent F. Schimmoller 

Regional Federal Highway Administrator (HRA-08) 

Lakewood, Colorado 

Dear Mr. Schimmoller: 

This is in response to your May 25 memorandum requesting acceptance of a single 

unmodified 102-mm by 152-mm western red cedar wood post as meeting breakaway 

requirements for use on the National Highway System. Transmitted with your 

memorandum were two reports of tests conducted on the posts at the Federal Outdoor 

Impact Laboratory (FOIL). The tested posts were full-cut lumber, not “dressed” to a 

smaller cross section. 

Crash testing with a bogie vehicle was conducted to assess the breakaway performance of 

the subject small sign support mounted in “weak” (S-2) soil. Requirements for 

breakaway supports are found in the 1985 American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO) Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for

Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals. These specifications have been adopted, 

with minor modifications by the FHWA. Guidelines established in the National 

Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 350 were used to conduct the tests and 

to analyze their results. 

The distance to the bottom of the sign panel was 2130 mm. A summary of the crash tests 

is presented below: 

Test Number (Target Values) 93F001 93F002 

Vehicle Mass, kg 820 820 820 

Impact Speed, km/h 35.0, 100.0 34.1 97.0 

Soil Type N/a S-2 S-2 

Occupant Impact Speed, m/s Maximum 5.0 1.5 0.8 

Vehicle Velocity Change, m/s Maximum 5.0 

(not a requirement)

1.6 1.0 

Stub Height, mm Maximum 100 mm No stub No stub 
Because S-2 soil is the “worst case” test condition for wood posts, testing in S-1 “strong” 

soil is not necessary. In both tests the posts broke below the ground line and at the 

bumper height. The broken part of the post pulled out of the ground leaving no stub 

projecting above the ground line. 

The results of these tests meet the change-in-velocity and stub-heights requirements 

adopted by the FHWA. The unmodified 102x152-mm western red cedar wood signpost 

is, therefore, acceptable for use in all soil types on projects on the National Highway 

System, within the range of conditions tested, if proposed by a State. 

Our acceptance is limited to the breakaway characteristics of the signpost and does not 

cover the structural features. Presumably the State will develop sufficient information on 

structural design and installation requirements to ensure proper performance, including 

proper wood grading when specifying the posts. 

 Sincerely yours, 

 Seppo I. Sillan, Acting Chief 

 Federal-Aid and Design Division 

Federal Highway Administration 

HNG-14:Nartimovich:gm:366-1331:6-16-95 

Copies to: 

HPD-1 HNG-1 HNG-10 Reader, 3128 File, 3128 

Ras HFL-1 HHS-10 HSR-20 HAD-SD 

Geometric and Roadside Design Acceptance letter No. SS-46
DroneMission.com archives