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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF ADAM.COM, INC. AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND FOR THE NINE
MONTHS THEN ENDED, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US$

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                0.00001
<CASH>                                           1,477
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      931
<ALLOWANCES>                                       103
<INVENTORY>                                        314
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,544
<PP&E>                                           3,589
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,840
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,736
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,359
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            54
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,323
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,736
<SALES>                                          3,144
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,144
<CGS>                                              559
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,056
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   5
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,579)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (9,579)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,579)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.04)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.15

                                     AMCAST
                             INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION

                                     AMENDED
                         DIRECTOR STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT

This Amended  Director Stock Option  Agreement  amends and replaces that certain
Director Stock Option Agreement  between the Company and the Optionee dated June
1,2001

Amcast  Industrial  Corporation,  an Ohio corporation  (the  "Company"),  hereby
grants, under

and pursuant to the  Non-Qualified  Director Stock Option Agreement  between the
Optionee and the Company dated February 16, 2001 (the "Agreement"),  of which is
attached hereto as Appendix A and is incorporated herein by this reference to


Byron O. Pond
("Optionee")


Effective the 1st day of June ,2001 (the "date of grant"),  for the purposes set
forth in the Plan,  the right and option to  purchase  250,000,  Two Hundred and
Fifty Thousand Common Shares of the Company  ("Shares") at the purchase price of
$8.80 per Share (the "Option").

The Option granted herein is granted  subject to all the terms and conditions of
the Agreement, including, but not limited to, the following provisions:

1

The Option  shall  expire at the close of business  five years after the date of
grant of the option shares unless sooner terminated or exercised pursuant to the
terms of the Plan;

2

Pursuant to the Agreement,  the option shares shall vest and become  exercisable
as follows:  85,000  shares shall vest and become  exercisable  June 1, 2001, an
additional 82,500 shares shall vest and become exercisable  January 1, 2002, the
remaining 82,500 shares shall vest and become exercisable January 1, 2003,

3

Optionee  shall forfeit all right and interest in any unvested  option shares if
he is not employed by the Company on the vesting date,


4

The option may be exercised at any time up to three years  following the date of
final  vesting of the option  shares  subject  to  Section 6  (Exercise)  of the
Agreement


<PAGE>


5. The Option may not be transferred,  assigned, pledged, or hypothecated by the
Optionee during his lifetime.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,  the Company has executed this Amended Option as of the 17th
day of August, 2001.

                                    AMCAST INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION

                                    By:    /s/ Leo W. Ladehoff
                                             Leo W. Ladehoff
                                             Chairman of the Board


(CORPORATE SEAL)


    /s/ Denis G. Daly
Secretary



                                              /s/ Byron O. Pond
                                         Byron O. Pond
                                         Optionee
**Exhibit 23.2**

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatements of A.D.A.M., Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-07785, effective July 9, 1996, File No. 333-92403, effective December 9, 1999, File No. 333-65452, effective July 19, 2001, File No. 333-113848, effectiveMarch 23, 2004, File No. 333-140926, effective February 27, 2007, File No. 333-149358, effective February 22, 2008, and File No. 333-157594, effective February 27, 2009), and Forms S-3 (File No. 333-45294,effective September 15, 2000, and File No. 333-88540, effective June 3, 2002) of our report dated March 17, 2008 related to the consolidated financial statements of the Company appearing in the Company’s Annual Report onForm 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008. 

/s/ Tauber & Balser, P.C. 

Atlanta, Georgia 

March 20, 2009
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 11-1800

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * Western District of Missouri. * Octavio Huerta-Medina, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: September 7, 2011 Filed: September 9, 2011

___________ Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Octavio Huerta-Medina pleaded guilty to attempting to assault, impede, and injure a federal officer engaged in his official duties, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1) and (b). According to undis puted portions of the presentence report, Huerta-Medina was driving his vehicle w ith his pregnant girlfriend and a young child as passengers, when law enfo rcement officers attempted to execute arrest warrants on him. Huerta-Medina then rammed his vehi cle into a police car, drove off at high speed, struck a bystander’s vehicle, drove into oncoming lanes of traffic, andultimately collided with the victim-FBI ag ent’s vehicle. The District Court 1 sentenced him to 70 months in prison. On appeal, his counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), seeking to withdraw and arguing that the District Court erred by (1) applying enhancemen ts under both U.S.S.G. § 2A2.2(b)(6) and § 3A1.2(c)(1) and (2) appl ying an enhancement for reckless endangerment during flight based on the same conduct encomp assed in the offense Guideline, see U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2, comment. (n.1).

We conclude that the Di strict Court properly applied the Guidelines. See United States v. Bates , 584 F.3d 1105, 1108 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review). First, the Guidelines expressly required both a 2-level increase for Huerta-Medina’s conviction under section 111(b), seeU.S.S.G. § 2A2.2(b)(6), and an official-victim enhancement, seeU.S.S.G. § 2A2.2, comment. (n.4) (“If subsection (b)(6) applies, § 3A1.2 (Official Victim) also shall apply.”) . Second, we conclude that the recklessendangerment enhancement was proper because Huerta -Medina endangered other motorists and his own passengers during the car chase and that conduct was not the same as his eventual assault of a federal officer. Cf. United States v. Miner , 108 F.3d 967, 970 (8th Cir.) (approving Chapter Three adjustments both for official victim, based on defendant’s ramming his car in to police roadblock, and for reckless endangerment during flight , based on defendant’s c onduct during car chase that created risk of serious injury to other drivers and pedestrians), cert. denied , 522 U.S. 904 (1997). Having independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw and we affirm the judgment of the District Court.

______________________________

1 The Honorable Dean Whipple, United St ates District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. -2-
EXHIBIT 11.2

<TABLE>
CPI CORP. COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
(in thousands of dollars except per share amounts)
Forty Weeks Ended November 8, 1997 and November 9, 1996
<CAPTION>
                                          Forty Weeks Ended 
                                         -----------------------
                                          Nov. 8,      Nov. 9,  
                                            1997         1996   
                                         ---------    --------- 
<S>                                      <C>          <C>
Primary:

  Net earnings (loss) applicable
    to common shares                     $ (1,752)    $  2,111
                                         =========    ========= 

Shares (in thousands of shares): 

  Weighted average number of
    common shares outstanding              17,379       17,227  

  Shares issuable under employee
    stock plans - weighted average             35           40  

  Dilutive effect of exercise of
    certain stock options                     179           52  

  Less:  Treasury stock - weighted
    average                                (5,584)      (3,303) 
                                         ---------    --------- 
  Weighted average number of common
    and common equivalent shares
    outstanding                            12,009       14,016  
                                         =========    ========= 
Net earnings (loss) per common and
    common equivalent shares             $  (0.15)    $   0.15  
                                         =========    ========= 

</TABLE>








                              33
#### Raymond B. SAVARESE, Appellant, v. Beatrice M. SAVARESE, Appellee.

No. 70-651.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 10, 1971.

Appeal dismissed.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2023-2635

_____________________________

SHAWN MARTIN,

Petitioner,

v.

RICKY D. DIXON, Secretary, 

Florida Department of 

Corrections,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Certiorari—Original Jurisdiction.

June 21, 2024

PER CURIAM.

The Court denies the petition for writ of certiorari on the 

merits. 

LEWIS, ROBERTS, and RAY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Shawn Martin, pro se, Petitioner.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
**Exhibit 31.2**
CERTIFICATION
I, Amy Vidrine Samson, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period endedSeptember 26, 2004 of Crown Crafts, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand we have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: November 10, 2004                                                   /s/ Amy Vidrine Samson   Amy Vidrine Samson   Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
Filed 2/21/14 P. v. Lott CA2/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for 

publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication 

or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

JONATHAN BOOKER LOTT,

Defendant and Appellant.

 B251407

 (Los Angeles County

 Super. Ct. No. VA058860)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Roger 

Ito, Judge. Dismissed.

Jill Ishida, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and 

Appellant.

No appearance on behalf of Plaintiff and Respondent.
2

Defendant, Jonathan Booker Lott, purports to appeal from a July 30, 2013 postjudgment order denying his motion to correct his sentence. The post-judgment motion 

argued that defendant had not been convicted of five felonies and there was an error in 

connection with an alleged mitigating factor. We noted the post-judgment order may not 

be appealable. (People v. Cantrell (1961) 197 Cal.App.2d 40, 43; People v. Bowles

(1933) 135 Cal.App. 514, 516; see People v. Thomas (1959) 52 Cal.2d 521, 527; see 6 

Witkin & Epstein, Cal. Criminal Law (4th ed. 2012) “Criminal Appeals,” § 65 pp. 341-

342.) We thus issued an order to show cause concerning possible dismissal and placed 

the matter on calendar. We have a duty to raise issues concerning our jurisdiction on our 

own motion. (Jennings v. Marralle (1994) 8 Cal.4th 121, 126; Olson v. Cory (1983) 35 

Cal.3d 390, 398.) 

Defendant argues he is raising an issue of a legally unauthorized sentence which 

may be raised at anytime. (People v. Scott (1994) 9 Cal.4th 331, 354; People v. Price

(2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 224, 241.) However, the gravamen of his post-judgment motion 

relates to non-jurisdictional constitutional matters involving United States v. Booker

(2005) 543 U.S. 220, 230-237 and similar decisions. These issues are not of the character 

involving legally unauthorized sentences. (See People v. Gonzalez (2003) 31 Cal.4th 

745, 751; People v. Bonnetta (2009) 46 Cal.4th 143, 152; People v. Davis (1981) 29 

Cal.3d 814, 827, fn. 5.) Hence, his appeal must be dismissed. Of course, if there is an 

issue of legally unauthorized sentence or a non-jurisdictional error, defendant, who is 

represented by counsel, may file a habeas corpus petition. We will promptly consider 

any such petition.
3

DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed. 

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

TURNER, P. J.

We concur:

KRIEGLER, J.

MINK, J.

 

 Retired Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice 

pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Annual Report of Isle of Capri Casinos, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K/A (Amendment
No. 2) for the period ended April 25, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Annual Report"), I, Dale R. Black, Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that:



Date: August 23, 2010

/s/ DALE R. BLACK Dale R. Black Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 238 (Thursday, December 11, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65243-65244]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32466]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


Barnard College; Notice of Decision on Application for Duty-Free 
Entry of Scientific Instrument

    This is a decision consolidated pursuant to Section 6(c) of the 
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 
(Pub. L. 89-651, 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301). Related records can be 
viewed between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. in Room 4211, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.
    Docket Number: 97-084. Applicant: Barnard College, New York, NY 
10027-6598. Instrument: Electron Microscope, Model EM208S. 
Manufacturer: Philips,

[[Page 65244]]

The Netherlands. Intended Use: See notice at 62 FR 52685, October 9, 
1997. Order Date: July 4, 1997.
    Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of 
equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such 
purposes as the instrument is intended to be used, was being 
manufactured in the United States at the time the instrument was 
ordered. Reasons: The foreign instrument is a conventional transmission 
electron microscope (CTEM) and is intended for research or scientific 
educational uses requiring a CTEM. We know of no CTEM, or any other 
instrument suited to these purposes, which was being manufactured in 
the United States at the time of order of the instrument.
Frank W. Creel,
Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff.
[FR Doc. 97-32466 Filed 12-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2597 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 1501 North 6th Street 

in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, as the ‘‘Judge Sylvia H. Rambo United 

States Courthouse’’, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 15, 2021 

Mr. PERRY (for himself, Ms. WILD, Mr. FITZPATRICK, Mr. CARTWRIGHT, Mr. 

KELLER, and Mr. RESCHENTHALER) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 1501 

North 6th Street in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, as the 

‘‘Judge Sylvia H. Rambo United States Courthouse’’, 

and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. JUDGE SYLVIA H. RAMBO UNITED STATES 

4 COURTHOUSE. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The United States courthouse 

6 located at 1501 North 6th Street in Harrisburg, Pennsyl7 vania, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Judge Sylvia 

8 H. Rambo United States Courthouse’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2597 IH

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the United States courthouse referred to in sub4 section (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Judge 

5 Sylvia H. Rambo United States Courthouse’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### Warren H. EDWARDS, Judge of the Criminal Court of Record, Division A, Orange County, Florida, Petitioner, v. Willie B. CLARK, Charles A. Brown, Robert G. Coleman, Jr., Ronald J. Nelson and Charles D. Wade, Respondents.

No. 39678.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 23, 1970.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Charles M. Musgrove, Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.

Peter M. de Manió, of Bowden & de Manió, Orlando, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

Petition for writ of certiorari is denied on authority of State ex rel. Leon v. Baker, 238 So.2d 281, filed July 29, 1970.

It is so ordered.

ERVIN, C. J., and DREW, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.

ROBERTS, J., dissents and would recede from Baker case.
<PAGE>


                                                                     EXHIBIT 21

              Santa Barbara Restaurant Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
                              List of Subsidiaries

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
           ENTITY                        STATE OF INCORPORATION        DBA
          --------                       ----------------------        ---
                                                                       N/A
<S>                                      <C>                           <C>
Santa Barbara Restaurant Group, Inc.     Delaware                      Timber Lodge Steakhouse
Timber Lodge Steakhouse, Inc.            Minnesota                     Green Burrito
GB Grill Franchise Corporation           California                    Green Burrito
Green Burrito, Inc.                      California                    La Salsa
La Salsa, Inc.                           California                    La Salsa
La Salsa Franchise, Inc.                 California                    La Salsa
La Salsa of Nevada, Inc.                 Nevada
</TABLE>
U.S. TREASURY FINANCING SCHEDULE FOR 4TH QUARTER 2002

BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

ANNOUNCEMENT AUCTION SETTLEMENT OFFERED MATURING NEW

ISSUE DATE DATE DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT MONEY

4-WK 3-MO 6-MO

4-WEEK AND 9/26 9/30 10/3 16.00 16.00 14.00 49.08 -3.08

3&6 MONTH BILLS 10/3 10/7 10/10 14.00 16.00 14.00 44.89 -0.89

10/10 10/15 10/17 14.00 17.00 15.00 44.18 1.82

10/17 10/21 10/24 18.00 18.00 16.00 44.71 7.29

10/24 10/28 10/31 18.00 18.00 17.00 44.58 8.42

10/31 11/4 11/7 18.00 18.00 17.00 45.00 8.00

11/7 11/12 11/14 18.00 18.00 17.00 45.00 8.00

11/14 11/18 11/21 22.00 17.00 15.00 48.00 6.00

11/21 11/25 11/29 22.00 17.00 15.00 48.00 6.00

11/27 12/2 12/5 18.00 16.00 14.00 48.00 0.00

12/5 12/9 12/12 16.00 16.00 14.00 49.00 -3.00

12/12 12/16 12/19 12.00 15.00 14.00 53.00 -12.00

12/19 12/23 12/26 12.00 15.00 14.00 53.00 -12.00

631.00 616.44 14.56

COUPONS

CHANGE

IN SIZE

10-Year TIPS (R) 10/7 10/9 10/15 7.00 -2.00 0.00 7.00

2-Year Note 10/21 10/23 10/31 27.00 21.16 5.84

5-Year Note 10/30 11/5 11/15 22.00

10-Year Note 10/30 11/6 11/15 18.00 2.96 37.04

2-Year Note 11/25 11/27 12/2 27.00 21.32 5.68

2-Year Note 12/19 12/23 12/31 27.00 20.68 6.32

121.00 66.12 61.88

R = Reopening NET CASH RAISED THIS QUARTER: 76.44

A = Announced

A A A

A

A

A A A

Treasury announced a 

Q4 borrowing need of 

$76 billion on 10/28/02

A A A

A A A

A A A