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

<ARTICLE>                                 5
<CIK>                                     0000027748
<NAME>                                    DEL GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES CORP.

<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            AUG-02-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              MAY-01-1999
<CASH>                                        952,144
<SECURITIES>                                1,068,384
<RECEIVABLES>                              16,191,782
<ALLOWANCES>                                  264,106
<INVENTORY>                                34,936,021
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           60,632,178
<PP&E>                                     21,642,739
<DEPRECIATION>                              7,777,828
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             82,237,669
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      14,673,109
<BONDS>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                      815,799
<OTHER-SE>                                 63,295,073
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               82,237,669
<SALES>                                    49,416,143
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           49,416,143
<CGS>                                      29,204,291
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              29,204,291
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           13,143,128
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            101,289
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             6,967,435
<INCOME-TAX>                                2,159,905
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         4,807,530
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                4,807,530
<EPS-BASIC>                                     .63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .59



</TABLE>
#### Harvey Leon PRATER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-402.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 11, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                          OF CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER

            PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The  undersigned,  Robert A. Bourne,  the  President and Treasurer of CNL Realty
Corporation,  the  corporate  general  partner of CNL Income Fund IX, Ltd.  (the
"Partnership"),  has executed this  certification  in connection with the filing
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission of the Partnership's  Annual Report
on Form  10-K for the  period  ending  December  31,  2003 (the  "Report").  The
undersigned hereby certifies 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 results of operations of the Partnership.


Date:   March 23, 2004


                               /s/ Robert A. Bourne
                               --------------------------------------------
                               Name:  Robert A. Bourne
                               Title: President and Treasurer

                               A  signed  original  of  this  written  statement
                               required by Section 906 has been  provided to CNL
                               Income Fund IX, Ltd.  and will be retained by CNL
                               Income  Fund  IX,  Ltd.  and   furnished  to  the
                               Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its staff
                               upon request.
In the Matter of 

SECRfTARY 

Ardagh Group S.A., 

a public limited liability company, and 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

DOCKET NO. 9356 

Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc., 

a corporation, and 

Compagnie de Saint-Gobain, 

a corporation, 

Respondents. 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO RESCHEDULE 

FINAL PREHEARJNG CONFERENCE 

On December 16, 2013, the parties to this action filed a Joint Motion to Reschedule Final 

Prehearing Conference. The final prehearing conference in this matter is presently scheduled for 

December 17, 2013. According to the Joint Motion, the parties are actively involved in 

settlement negotiations, which, if successful, will obviate the need for, and expense of, the 

evidentiary hearing. 

Accordingly, the Joint Motion is GRANTED, and it is hereby ORDERED that the final 

prehearing conference in this case, scheduled for December 17, 2013 at 10:00 a.m., is postponed 

and will be rescheduled at a later date. An appropriate order will be issued as necessary. 

ORDERED: 

Date: December 16, 20 13
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 Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on May 16, 2018, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), DVD Copy Control Association (“DVD CCA”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Delphi Automotive Systems, LLC, Troy, MI, has been added as a party to this venture.                

Also, Behavior Tech Computer Corp., Fremont, CA; and Rainbo Records Manufacturing Corporation, Canoga Park, CA, have withdrawn as parties to this venture.

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and DVD CCA intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On April 11, 2001, DVD CCA filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on August 3, 2001 (66 FR 40727).                          ( print page 26499)    

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on February 15, 2018. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on March 12, 2018 (83 FR 10751).                

Patricia A. Brink,

Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 2018-12209 Filed 6-6-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
----

----

EXHIBIT (32)(a)

| (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 results of operations of the Company. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                 |   |                                                         |   |
|----------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Date: April 28, 2010 | By:    | /s/ Vinod M. Khilnani                                   |   |
|                 |   | Vinod M. Khilnani                                            |   |
|                 |   | Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                 |   |                                                         |   |
No. 10231.

#### The City of Columbus *v.*The Columbus Ice Co.

Decided June 2, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

*Mr. George S. Marshall,*city solicitor, and *Messrs. Weinland, Hoover & Carter,*assistant city solicitors, for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Huggins, Huggins & Johnson*and *Messrs. Sater, Seymour & Safer,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Price, C. J., Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.
Motion Granted; Order filed June 2, 2016 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-16-00170-CV

____________

BELINDA DAWN TIDWELL, Appellant

V.

JOHN ROBERSON AND GRIMES AND FERTITTA, P. C., Appellees

On Appeal from the 506th Judicial District Court

Waller County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 13-03-21887

ORDER

This is an appeal from a turnover order signed December 7, 2015. On June 1, 

2016, appellant filed a motion in this court requesting a stay of the enforcement of 

the judgment pending review of the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion to 

stay judgment pending appeal or motion for approval of a supersedeas bond. Texas 

Rule of Appellate Procedure 24.4(c) provides that in a review from the trial court’s 

supersedeas determination, an appellate court may “issue any temporary orders 

necessary to preserve the parties’ rights.” Tex. R. App. P. 24.4(c). 
Appellant requests that we stay enforcement of the judgment until this court 

can review the trial court’s decision on the motion for stay or approval of a 

supersedeas bond. 

It appears from the facts stated in the motion that appellant’s rights will be 

prejudiced unless immediate temporary relief is granted. Accordingly, we grant the 

motion and issue the following order.

We therefore ORDER that enforcement of the trial court’s judgment is stayed 

in trial court cause number 13-03-21887, styled John Roberson and Grimes and 

Fertitta, P.C. v. Belinda Dawn Tidwell and Jennifer D. McCallum. Enforcement of 

the judgment is stayed until further orders of this court.

Appellees are requested to file a response to appellant’s motion on or before 

June 17, 2016.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Boyce, Christopher, and Jamison.
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Charles Ray Miller, Appellant

No. 06-14-00123-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 8th District Court of 

Hopkins County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 

1423720). Opinion delivered by Chief 

Justice Morriss, Justice Carter and Justice 

Moseley participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Charles Ray Miller, has adequately indicated his inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED DECEMBER 12, 2014

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
#### HIGH, CLARKE & FENEIS, INC., a Florida corporation, Petitioner, v. PUBLIC SERVICE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a New York corporation, Respondent.

No. 40235.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 18, 1971.

Certiorari denied. 238 So.2d 169. .

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.37

                      Amendment to Unit Purchase Agreement
                            dated February 14, 1996
                                   offered by
                        Instant Video Technologies, Inc.


        This Amendment to Unit Purchase Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into
as of September 16, 1997, with reference to the following facts:

        WHEREAS, the undersigned have entered into a Unit Purchase Agreement
with Instant Video Technologies, Inc. dated February 14, 1996;

        WHEREAS, section 1.2(a) of said Unit Purchase Agreement states: "At any
time and from time to time during the period immediately following the Closing
and ending on December 31, 1996, the Company may at one or more additional
closings (each an "Additional Closing"), without obtaining the signature,
consent or permission of any of the Investors, offer and sell to other
investors ("New Investors"), at a price of $1.00 per Unit, (i) up to that
number of units such that the total number of Units sold by the Company
(inclusive of the number of Units sold at the Closing and at any prior
Additional Closings) equals five million (5,000,000)."

        WHEREAS, Instant Video Technologies, Inc. desires to sell additional
Units beyond the December 31, 1996 date;

        WHEREAS, section 8.9 of the Unit Purchase Agreement provides for a vote
of the holders of two-thirds of the Units to amend the Agreement;

        NOW THEREFORE the Parties agree as follows: The first sentence of
section 2.2(a) shall be modified to read "At any time and from time to time
during the period immediately following the Closing and ending on December 341,
1998, the Company may have additional closings (each an "Additional Closing"),
without obtaining the signature, consent or permission of any of the
Investors, offer and sell to other investors ("New Investors"), at a price of
$1.00 per Unit, (i) up to that number of units such that the total number of
Units sold by the Company (inclusive of the number of Units sold at the Closing
and at any prior Additional Closings) equals five million (5,000,000)."

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties have entered into this Amendment as of
the date first written hereinabove.


STORIE PARTNERS, A CALIFORNIA                 MINDFUL PARTNERS, A CALIFORNIA
  LIMITED PARTNERSHIP                           LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

By: Storie Advisors, Inc.                     By: /s/ STUART RUDICK
    General Partner                              ------------------------------
                                                 Stuart Rudick, General Partner
By: /s/ STEVE LEDGER 
   -----------------------                    INSTANT VIDEO TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Title:  Managing Partner                        A DELAWARE CORPORATION

                                              By: /s/ RICHARD LANG
                                                 ------------------------------
                                                 Richard Lang, President
• AHRI working on FTC label

• Manufacturers-

– Working on proof of concepts for nameplate label

– Working on alternative penalties to fines from DOE 

• Distributors- bring back working group’s “violation” for distributors

• DOE

– Getting clarity on term “product” in prohibited act for manufacturers

– Getting department’s opinion on definitions

– Bringing back “violations” for deal/ contractors and distributors

– Bringing back split opinions on prohibited acts

– Does DOE have legal authority to require contractors to “fix” installations

– Length of time that records should be kept

– Skeleton of rulemaking

– Trifold ideas for group to review

• DOE and distributors/contrators working on record retention

Action Items (9/4/2014)
#### Honorable P. B. REVELS, Circuit Judge, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Volusia County, Florida, Petitioner, v. Donald E. WILKES, Respondent.

No. 40688.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 23, 1971.

Rehearing Denied April 7, 1971.

Certiorari denied. 245 So.2d 896.

ROBERTS, C. J., and CARLTON, ADKINS and DEKLE,. JJ., concur; ERVIN, J., dissents.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 11


              STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF INCOME PER SHARE
               FOR THE YEARS ENDED MARCH 31, 2001, 2000, AND 1999


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                   2001               2000                1999
                                                              ---------          ---------          ----------
<S>                                                           <C>                <C>                <C>
BASIC:
Weighted average number of common shares                      7,128,889          7,098,728           7,053,446
                                                              =========          =========           =========

DILUTED:
Weighted average number of common shares                      7,128,889          7,098,728           7,053,446
Dilutive effect of common stock equivalents:
   Stock options                                                      -                  -             138,097
                                                              ---------          ---------           ---------
Weighted average number of common equivalent shares
 outstanding                                                  7,128,889          7,098,728           7,191,543
                                                              =========          =========           =========
</TABLE>


                                      46
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 31 (Friday, February 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 7087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3765]


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


DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

February 7, 1997.
    The Department of Treasury has submitted the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Copies of 
the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau 
Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information 
collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the 
Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 
2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

Financial Management Service (FMS)

    OMB Number: 1510-0008.
    Form Number: None
    Type of Review: Extension.
    Title: Pools and Associations--Annual Letter.
    Description: The information is collected for the determination of 
an acceptable percentage for each pool and association to allow 
Treasury certified companies credit on their Schedule F for authorized 
ceded reinsurance in determining the companies' underwriting 
limitations.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 100.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Response: 1 hour, 30 minutes.
    Frequency of Response: Annually.
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 150 hours.
    OMB Number: 1510-0013.
    Form Number: FMS Form 2208.
    Type of Review: Extension.
    Title: State Where Licensed for Surety.
    Description: Information is collected from insurance companies in 
order to provide Federal bond approving officers with this information. 
The listing of states, by company, appears in Treasury's Circular 570, 
``Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds''.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 318.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per
    Response: 1 hour.
    Frequency of Response: Annually.
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 318 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Jacqueline R. Perry, (301) 344-8577, Financial 
Management Service, 3361-L 75th Avenue, Landover, MD 20785.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt, (202) 395-7860, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10202, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.
Lois K. Holland,
Departmental Reports Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-3765 Filed 2-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-35-P
*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. The court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

SEP 30 1997

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

HARRISON DWIGHT FOOS;

CAROLYN SUE FOOS,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

STEVE TIMKEN,

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 97-3129

(D.C. No. 97-CV-1129-MLB)

(Kansas)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before SEYMOUR, Chief Judge, PORFILIO and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is

therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Plaintiffs Harrison Dwight Foos and Carolyn Sue Foos appeal the dismissal
-2-

without prejudice of their complaint against Steve Timken. We agree with the

district court that plaintiffs have failed to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court

substantially for the reasons given in the court’s Memorandum and Order dated

May 5, 1997.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Stephanie K. Seymour

Chief Judge
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Marlin PRESTWOOD.

No. 60627.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 16, 1977.

In re: Marlin Prestwood, applying for remedial writ and stay order.

Writ denied. This Court will not interfere in the orderly process of the trial court.