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

<ARTICLE> 9
<RESTATED> 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                   1,343,681,000
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      90,245,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                           434,696,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                            24,729,000
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>              4,070,436,000
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                   3,005,329,000
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                     3,049,102,000
<LOANS>                                 23,235,922,000
<ALLOWANCE>                                329,051,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          33,925,047,000
<DEPOSITS>                              27,425,114,000
<SHORT-TERM>                             2,747,894,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                        482,304,000
<LONG-TERM>                                431,291,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                   137,627,000
<OTHER-SE>                               2,700,817,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>          33,925,047,000
<INTEREST-LOAN>                            503,943,000
<INTEREST-INVEST>                          109,236,000
<INTEREST-OTHER>                            14,918,000
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                           628,097,000
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                         259,339,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         301,777,000
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                      326,320,000
<LOAN-LOSSES>                               14,419,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             104,000
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                            242,022,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            178,236,000
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                 178,236,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               117,064,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .53
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .52
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.43
<LOANS-NON>                                154,720,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                28,665,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                             2,594,000
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                           304,223,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                               19,473,000
<RECOVERIES>                                 7,624,000
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                          329,051,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                       329,051,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                    329,051,000
        

</TABLE>
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
                                
                                
     DALLAS, TEXAS..HOWARD B. WOLF, INC. (HBW-AMEX) Dallas based

women's fashion apparel manufacturer, announces plans to complete

their Spring and Summer commitments and shipments, discontinue

the Fall 1999 collection and adopt a Plan of Liquidation and

Dissolution which will be presented to the Company's Shareholders

for adoption at a duly convened special shareholder meeting.

    For over forty-seven years this highly regarded fashion

leader has designed, manufactured and distributed fine women's

dresses and sportswear primarily to better specialty and

departmwnt stores.  Generational and societal changes in women's

buying habits have created a difficult environment for the 

survival of a great number of better specialty stores, the

Company's primary market.  This along with massive foreign    

imports, off-shore manufacturing and private labeling, without 

a foreseeable reversal of this course, has resulted in a 

climate in which the Company cannot operate profitably.

     All further information regarding the Plan and the

Shareholders' meetings will be provided in due course.  The Board

of Directors believes this action is appropriate in order to

continue to act in the bets interests of the Shareholders.

     The Company wishes to take advantage of the "safe harbor"

provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of

1995 with respect to statements that may be deemed to be 

forward-looking statements under the Act.                                


                              -End-
Exhibit 11

                         FARR COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES
                         EARNINGS PER SHARE CALCULATIONS
                                  (Unaudited)

As a result of the 3 for 2 stock split to be  distributed on March 28, 1997, per
share amounts for 1996 have been restated to reflect the weighted average number
of shares of common stock outstanding,  increased by shares issued for the stock
split.  The per share  amounts in 1996 are  calculated as though the stock split
occurred on the first day of the year.

                                               March 29, 1997   March 30, 1996
                                               --------------   --------------

BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE CALCULATION
------------------------------------

  Earnings:
     Net Income................................  $1,700,000       $1,178,000
                                                 ==========       ==========

  Shares:
     Weighted average number of common
       shares outstanding......................   5,466,879        5,437,732
                                                 ==========       ==========

  Net Income Per Common Share..................  $     0.31       $     0.21
                                                 ==========       ==========


PRIMARY EARNINGS PER SHARE CALCULATION
--------------------------------------

Earnings:
    Net Income.................................  $1,700,000       $1,178,000
                                                 ==========       ==========

Shares:
    Weighted average number of common
      shares outstanding.......................   5,466,879        5,437,732
    Assuming exercise of options reduced by
      the number of shares which could have
      been purchased with the proceeds from
      exercise of such options.................     152,871           38,832
                                                 ----------        ---------
    Weighted average number of common
      shares and dilutive common share
      equivalents outstanding..................   5,619,750        5,476,564
                                                 ==========       ==========

Net Income Per Common Share....................  $     0.30       $     0.21
                                                 ==========       ==========
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

July 17, 2012 

jam 

Order 

 

July 17, 2012 

145275 

ROBERT KENNETH BURKOWSKI, 

 Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 145275 

 CoA: 309583 

MICHIGAN REFORMATORY WARDEN, 

 Defendant-Appellee. 

___________________________________ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, plaintiff-appellant having failed to pay the 

partial filing fee as required by the order of June 14, 2012, the Clerk of the Court is 

hereby directed to close this file.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8741-8742]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4844]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
[CC Docket No. 92-237]


FCC Announces North American Numbering Council Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: On February 21, 1997, the Commission released a public notice 
announcing the March 11 meeting of the North American Numbering Council 
(NANC) and the Agenda for the meeting. The intended effect of this 
action is to make the public aware of this meeting of the NANC and its 
Agenda.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Simms, Administrative Assistant 
of the NANC, (202) 418-2330. The address is: Network Services Division, 
Common Carrier Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 2000 M 
Street, NW, Suite 235, Washington, D.C. 20054. The fax number is: (202) 
418-2345. The TTY number is: (202) 418-0484.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Released: January 21, 1997.
    The North American Numbering Council (NANC) will hold a meeting on 
Tuesday, March 11, 1997. The meeting will be held at 9:30 A.M. EST at 
the Federal Communications Commission,

[[Page 8742]]

1919 M Street, NW, Room 856, Washington, DC.
    This notice of the March 11, 1997 NANC meeting is being published 
in the Federal Register less than 15 calendar days prior to the meeting 
due to modifications to the meeting schedule of the NANC. This 
statement complies with the General Services Administration Management 
Regulations implementing the Federal Advisory Committee Act. See 41 CFR 
Sec. 101-6.1015(b)(2).
    The above meeting will be open to members of the general public. 
The FCC will attempt to accommodate as many people as possible. 
Admittance, however will be limited to the seating available. The 
public may submit written statements to the NANC, which must be 
received two business days before the meeting. In addition, oral 
statements at the meeting by parties or entities not represented on the 
NANC will be permitted to the extent time permits. Such statements will 
be limited to five minutes in length by any one party or entity, and 
requests to make an oral statement must be received two business days 
before the meeting. Requests to make an oral statement or provide 
written comments to the NANC should be sent to Linda Simms, at the 
address under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, stated above.

Agenda

    1. Report from NANC Working Groups.
    2. Other Business.

Federal Communications Commission.
Geraldine A. Matise,
Chief, Network Services Division, Common Carrier Bureau.
[FR Doc. 97-4844 Filed 2-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 

Office of the Secretary

November 10, 2014 

Deborah Clay 

State of California 

Re: In the Matter of Made in the USA Brand, LLC 

 File No. 142 3121, Docket No. C-4497 

Thank you for commenting on the Federal Trade Commission’s proposed consent agreement in 

the above-referenced proceeding. The Commission has considered your comment and placed it on the 

public record pursuant to Rule 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 16 C.F.R. § 

4.9(b)(6)(ii). 

In your comment, you request that the Commission require marketers to substantiate their U.S.-

origin and other claims. You do not propose any revisions to the draft complaint or the consent 

agreement. 

Section 5 of the FTC Act requires companies to possess substantiation for their marketing 

claims, and the Commission’s Enforcement Policy Statement on U.S.-Origin Claims provides specific 

guidance to marketers on how to substantiate those claims.1

 In particular, the Policy Statement provides 

that when a marketer makes an unqualified “Made in USA” claim, the marketer should – at the time the 

representation is made – possess and rely upon a reasonable basis establishing that the product is “all or 

virtually all” made in the United States. In this case, Section II of the consent agreement specifically 

requires Made in the USA Brand, LLC either to possess competent and reliable evidence substantiating 

its representations that products are made in the USA, or to disclose that it relies on self-certification to 

substantiate its clients’ claims. 

Therefore, after considering your comment, the Commission has determined that the relief set 

forth in the consent agreement is appropriate and sufficient to remedy the violations alleged in the 

complaint. At this time, the Commission has determined that the public interest would best be served by 

issuing the Decision and Order in final form without modification. The final Decision and Order and 

other relevant materials are available on the Commission’s website at http://www.ftc.gov. It helps the 

Commission’s analysis to hear from a variety of sources in its work, and we thank you again for your 

comment. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Donald S. Clark 

Secretary 

 

1 See 15 U.S.C. § 45(a) and Federal Trade Commission, Issuance of Enforcement Policy Statement on 

“Made in USA” and Other U.S. Origin Claims, 62 Fed. Reg. 63756, 63766 (December 2, 1997), 

available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/fedreg/1997/december/ 971202madeinusa.pdf.
EXHIBIT 99.2

                   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF
                        FINANCIAL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION
                       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  Quarterly  Report of Financial  Industries  Corporation
("FIC") on Form 10- Q for the quarter  ended March 31,  2003,  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, George
M. Wise, III, Chief Financial  Officer,  certify  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to the best of my knowledge and belief:

     (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
          FIC.



  /s/ George M. Wise, III
_____________________________
George M. Wise, III
Chief Financial Officer
Date: May 15, 2003
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 4, 2021

No. 04-21-00115-CV

UNIVERSITY OF THE INCARNATE WORD,

Appellant

v.

Valerie REDUS, Individually, and Robert M. Redus, Individually, and as Administrator of the 

Estate of Robert Cameron Redus,

Appellees

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-CI-07249

Honorable Cathleen M. Stryker, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

On October 29, 2021, appellees filed an opposed motion for leave to file sur-reply brief. 

Appellees’ motion is GRANTED. 

On October 19, 2021, this appeal was submitted on briefs. Appellant has filed a motion to 

grant oral argument. The motion is opposed by appellees. After considering the motion and 

examining the briefs, appellant’s request for oral argument is DENIED. See TEX. R. APP. P.

39.1(c),(d) (explaining that oral argument is not required if the court, after examining the briefs, 

decides that oral argument is unnecessary because “the facts and legal arguments are adequately 

presented in the briefs and record” or “the decisional process would not be significantly aided by 

oral argument”).

It is so ORDERED on November 4, 2021.

PER CURIAM
ATTESTED TO: _______________________

 MICHAEL A. CRUZ, 

 CLERK OF COURT
Sheinberg, Samuel I.

From:

Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2021 11:34 AM

To: Walsh, Kathryn E.; Berg, Karen E.; Sheinberg, Samuel I.; Six, Anne; Whitehead, Nora;
Musick, Vesselina

Subject: Fw: Agricultural Property 802.2(g)

From: Shaffer, Kristin <kshaffer@ftc.gov>

Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2021 11:33:29 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)
To:

Cc:

Subject: RE: Agricultural Propet Ag.

We agree your analysis, except for water rights. If they are being separately acquired (i.e., the rights need not run with
the land and are separately acquired), then 802.2(g) would not apply. “Assets incidental” to the ownership of
agricultural property are defined as items such as “cash, prepaid taxes or insurance, rentals receivable and the like.”

Best regards,
Kristin

Kristin Shaffer

Attorney

Premerger Notification Office
Federal Trade Commission
202-326-2288 | kshaffer@ftc.gov

From:

une 8, 2021 6:01 PM

Cc
Subject: Agricultural Property 802.2(g)

Hi PNO,

We’re looking at an asset acquisition of farm real property and want to make sure we’re appropriately applying the
802.2(g) exemption — can you confirm?

Buyer is acquiring the real property (including structures and irrigation systems), but not the farming business itself, and
not the equipment or inventory (crops or livestock). There are no processing or packing facilities on the property.

Considering the categories of assets that are exempt or non-exempt:
e — Agricultural land: All exempt under 802.2(g) because there are no processing or packing facilities, and the farm
business is not being acquired.
o Any grapevines or fruit trees would be non-exempt under PNPM Int 115.


¢ Water rights: The vast majority of these are situated in/on the real property to be acquired (simply a natural
resource of that property) so included in the 802.2(g) agricultural land exemption.

o Asmall fraction are leased rights in other real property that is not being acquired — could these also be
included in 802.2(g), or are they non-exempt? (We expect they would not be exempt under 802.2(c)
because used “in conjunction with” productive property.)

° Storage facilities, livestock management structures, irrigation systems: Non-exempt as PNPM Int 115 refers to
“structures on the land” as such.

© The storage facilities would only be exempt as “warehouses” under 802.2(h) if they’re currently storing third

party products.

Do you agree?
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

Federal Trade Commission 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 

Division of Advertising Practices 

August 29, 201 7 

John D. Graubert, Esq. 

Covington & Burling LLP 

One City Center 

850 Tenth Street, NW 

Washington, D.C. 20001 

Re: Procter & Gamble, FTC File No. 132-3190 

Dear Mr. Graubert: 

As you know, the staffofthe Federal Trade Commission's Division of Advertising 

Practices has conducted an investigation into the advertising of flushable wipes by your client, 

Procter & Gamble, for possible violations of Section 5 ofthe Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 

U.S.C. § 45. 

Upon careful review ofthis matter, including non-public information submitted to the 

staff, we have determined not to recommend enforcement action at this time. In coming to this 

conclusion, we considered a number offactors related to resource allocation. and enforcement 

priorities, as well as the nature of any FTC Act violation and the type and severity of any 

consumer injury. 

This action is not to be construed as a determination that a violation oflaw did not occur, 

just as the pendency of an investigation should not be construed as a determination that a 

violation has occurred. The Commission reserves the right to take such further action as the 

public interest may warrant. 

Very truly yours, 

J.~ ~ Associate Director 

Division ofAdvertising Practices
ORlG1NAL
 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE 

CASE NAME FILE/DOCKET NUMBER
 

In the Matter of McWane, Inc. and Star Pipe Products, Ltd. Federal Trade Commission Docket No. 9351
 

Pursuant to Section 4.1 of the Commission's Rules of Practice, I (we) am (are) ente . ..:t


proceeding the appearance of .. (~;
 

counsel supporting the complaint (Complete Items 1, 3, 4, and 5 below) \ JUL 2 7 2012
 

counselor representative for the respondent (Complete Items 1, 2, 4, and 5 below) \~~. 501ó2úg'


'_~~ETRY. fX counselor representative for a third party (Complete Items 1, 2, 4, and 5 below) 

1. COUNSEL OR REPRESENTATIVE 2. RESPONDENT(S) OR THIRD PARTY(IES) 

include the name, address, email address, and teiephone number of each include the address and telephone numbers of all persons, partnerships, 

counselor representative entering an appearance in the above proceeding, corporations, or associations on whose behalf this Notice of Appearance 

Is being filed. 

Gary M. London, Esq. American Cast Iron Pipe Company 

John C. Morrow, Esq. 1501 31st Avenue North 

Brent Dorner, Esq. Birmingham, Alabama 35207 

Burr & Forman LLP (205) 325-7701 

420 20th Street North, Suite 3400 

Birmingham, Aiabama 35203 

(205) 251-3000 

glondon@burr.com 

jrnorrow@burr.com 

bdorner@burr.com 

. 

3. ASSOCIATE/ASSISTANT DIRECTOR 

ED 7 ~t /7­

Return this form to: Federal Trade Commission

Room H-113 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20580 

FTC Form 232 (rev. 7/11) 

I 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing document by Federal Express 

or by US. First Class Mail, and by email on this the 26th day of July, 2012: 

The Offce of the Secretary
 

Federal Trade Commission
 

600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
 

Room H-113 

Washington, D.C. 20580 

Honorable D. Michael Chappell, Administrative Law Judge
 

Federal Trade Commission
 

600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
 

RoomH-106
 

Washington, D.C. 20580
 

oalj@ftc.gov
 

Thomas W. Thagard III 

Maynard Cooper & Gale, P.e. 

1901 Sixth Avenue North
 

2400 Regions/Harbert Tower
 

Birmingham, AL 35203
 

tthagard(ã)ma ynardcooper .com 

Edward Hassi
 

Federal Trade Commission
 

600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
 

Washington, D.C. 20580
 

ehassi@ftc.2:ov
 

Michael J. Bloom
 

Bureau of Competition
 

Federal Trade Commission
 

601 New Jersey Avenue NW
 

Washington, D.C. 20580
 

mjbloom(ÇvJtc.2:0V
 z¿ tJ r Ìh OF COUNSEL
#### Marianne Erna BISHOP, Appellant, v. Brian Barr BISHOP, Appellee.

No. 72-1145.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 27, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8663-8664]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4730]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 352

[Docket No. 78N-0038]
RIN 0910-AA01


Sunscreen Drug Products for Over-the-Counter Human Use; Amendment 
to the Tentative Final Monograph; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a notice 
of proposed rulemaking that appeared in the Federal Register of 
September 16, 1996 (61 FR 48645). The document proposed to amend the 
tentative final monograph (proposed rule) for over-the-counter (OTC) 
sunscreen drug products. The document was published with an error. This 
document corrects that error.


[[Page 8664]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John D. Lipnicki, Center for Drug 
Evaluation and Research (HFD-560), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 
Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-2222.
    In FR Doc. 96-23547, appearing on page 48645 in the Federal 
Register of Monday, September 16, 1996, the following correction is 
made:


Sec. 352.20  [Corrected]

    1. On page 48654, in the third column, in Sec. 352.20 Permitted 
combination of active ingredients, in paragraph (a)(2), beginning in 
the second line, ``Sec. 352.10(b), (c), (f), (i), (k), (l), (m), (n), 
(o), (s), and (u)'' is corrected to read ``Sec. 352.10(b), (c), (d), 
(f), (i), (l), (m), (n), (o), (s), and (u)''.

    Dated: February 19, 1997.
William K. Hubbard,
Associate Commissioner for Policy Coordination.
[FR Doc. 97-4730 Filed 2-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F