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

<ARTICLE>	5
<MULTIPLIER>	1000
<PERIOD-TYPE>		6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>			APR-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>			OCT-30-1999
<CASH>			5,520
<SECURITIES>			7,856
<RECEIVABLES>			10,917
<ALLOWANCES>			513
<INVENTORY>			14,072
<CURRENT-ASSETS>			38,883
<PP&E>			127,916
<DEPRECIATION>			90,951
<TOTAL-ASSETS>			138,792
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>			19,988
<BONDS>			0
<COMMON>			858
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>			0
<PREFERRED>			0
<OTHER-SE>			85,974
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>			138,792
<SALES>			88,797
<TOTAL-REVENUES>			88,797
<CGS>			58,137
<TOTAL-COSTS>			13,653
<OTHER-EXPENSES>			18,348
<LOSS-PROVISION>			0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>			292
<INCOME-PRETAX>		(1,751)
<INCOME-TAX>			(805)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>			(946)
<DISCONTINUED>			0
<EXTRAORDINARY>			0
<CHANGES>			0
<NET-INCOME>			(946)
<EPS-BASIC>			 (0.91)
<EPS-DILUTED>			 (0.91)
#### BAPTIST FOUNDATION OF AMERICA, a non-profit corporation, Appellant, v. N. Leslie CARPENTER and Lisbon Holding and Investment Company, Ltd., Appellees.

No. 70-1076.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 20, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
# **GATEWAYENERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES**

### **EXHIBIT 99.1**

 

# **OFFICERCERTIFICATION**

 

We herebycertify that this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly periodended June 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of15(d) of the Exchange Act, and that the information contained herein fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of Gateway Energy Corporation and its subsidiaries for the periodspresented.

 

 
|            | /s/ Michael T. Fadden                 |   | /s/ Scott D. Heflin                   |   |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|            | Chief Executive Officer and President |   | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |   |
|            |                                  |   |                                  |
|            |                                  |   |                                  |
| August 14, 2002 |                                  |   |                                  |   |
| (Date)          |                                  |   |                                  |   |
|                 |                                       |        |                                       |        |  |

 

----
Exhibit 31.6
   1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of SkillSoft Public Limited Company;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;3.
    
    Omitted;4.
    
    Omitted;5.
    
    Omitted.
 Dated: September 17, 2008
    /s/ Thomas J. McDonaldThomas J. McDonaldChief Financial Officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-13-00664-CR

Anthony Lamonte HARRIS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR0729

Honorable Maria Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE BARNARD, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE ALVAREZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. 

SIGNED November 6, 2013.

_________________________________

Marialyn Barnard, Justice
<PAGE>

                               Verizon North Inc.


                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

                                                          Three Months Ended
(Dollars in Millions)                                       March 31, 2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income before provision for income taxes                              $272.8
Equity in loss from affiliate                                            1.0
Interest expense                                                        26.8
Portion of rent expense representing interest                            7.0
Amortization of capitalized interest                                      .3
                                                        --------------------

Earnings, as adjusted                                                 $307.9
                                                        ====================

Fixed charges:
Interest expense                                                      $ 26.8
Portion of rent expense representing interest                            7.0
Capitalized interest                                                      .4
                                                        --------------------

Fixed Charges                                                         $ 34.2
                                                        ====================

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                                      9.00
                                                        ====================
House Calendar No. 70

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 220

[Report No. 103–187]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2667)

30, 1993, and for other purposes.the Midwest for the fiscal year ending Septemberfor relief from the major, widespread flooding inmaking emergency supplemental appropriations

JULY 21, 1993

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
IV

House Calendar No. 70

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 220

[Report No. 103–187]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2667) making emergency supplemental appropriations for relief from the major, widespread flooding

in the Midwest for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1993, and

for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 21, 1993

Mr. WHEAT, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution;

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2667) making

emergency supplemental appropriations for relief from

the major, widespread flooding in the Midwest for the

fiscal year ending September 30, 1993, and for other

purposes.

1 Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this

2 resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of

3 rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee

4 of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consider5 ation of the bill (H.R. 2667) making emergency supple-
2

•HRES 220 RH

1 mental appropriations for relief from the major, wide2 spread flooding in the Midwest for the fiscal year ending

3 September 30, 1993, and for other purposes. The first

4 reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of

5 order against consideration of the bill are waived. General

6 debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed

7 one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman

8 and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appro9 priations. After general debate the bill shall be considered

10 for amendment under the five-minute rule. The modifica11 tion to the bill printed in part 1 of the report of the Com12 mittee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be con13 sidered as adopted in the House and in the Committee

14 of the Whole. The bill, as modified, shall be considered

15 as read. All points of order against the bill, as modified,

16 are waived. No amendment to the bill, as modified, shall

17 be in order except the amendment printed in part 2 of

18 the report. The amendment printed in part 2 of the report

19 may be offered only by the named proponent or a designee,

20 shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time

21 specified in the report equally divided and controlled by

22 the proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject

23 to amendment. At the conclusion of consideration of the

24 bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report

25 the bill, as modified, to the House with such amendment
3

•HRES 220 RH

1 as may have been adopted. The previous question shall

2 be considered as ordered on the bill and amendment there3 to to final passage without intervening motion except one

4 motion to recommit.
# Official Journal L 120/2020

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 120 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6317 April 2020 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 120

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6317 April 2020

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/530 of 16 April 2020 extending the mandate of the Head of Mission of the European Union Advisory Mission in support of Security Sector Reform in Iraq (EUAM Iraq) | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

DECISIONS

*

Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/530 of 16 April 2020 extending the mandate of the Head of Mission of the European Union Advisory Mission in support of Security Sector Reform in Iraq (EUAM Iraq)

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
#### OUTDOOR RESORTS OF AMERICA, INC., a foreign corporation, Appellant, v. Richard A. PELLAR, Appellee.

No. 71-1133.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 3, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
#### UNITED STATES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, Thomas M. Le Retilley, and Thomas C. Le Retilley, Appellants, v. Lori Lynn JOHNSTON, a minor, by and through her mother and next friend, Toby A. Johnston, and Toby A. Johnston, Individually, Anthony A. Bevilacqua, Jr., and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, an Illinois Corporation, Appellees.

No. 76-2301.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 9, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 9, 1978.

Janis M. Halker of Gurney, Gurney & Handley, P.A., Orlando, for appellants.

John C. Briggs of Robertson, Williams, Duane & Lewis, P.A., Orlando, for appel-lees — Lori Lynn Johnston and Toby Johnston.

James M. Hess and James 0. Driscoll of Driscoll, Baugh, Langston, Layton & Kane, Orlando, for appellees — Anthony A. Bevi-lacqua and State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

Appellants were among several Defendants against whom Judgments were entered as a result of a personal injury suit. Appellees-Bevilacqua and State Farm were the other Defendants who had settled out after the jury verdict of liability but before the verdict on damages. The court assessed costs against Appellants but not against Bevilacqua and State Farm. Appellants complain that the court should have assessed costs against all Defendants equally even though the Appellee-Defendants settled before the verdict on damages.

Costs awards are generally within the sound discretion of the trial judge, *del Real v. Dawson,*320 So.2d 20 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). Appellants have not shown the trial judge abused his discretion. We have considered the remaining points on appeal and find them without merit.

AFFIRMED.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and LETTS, J., con- • cur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          14,268
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          12,031
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                10,809
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     80,155
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           8,862
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             9,090
<LOANS>                                        275,607
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,827
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 419,820
<DEPOSITS>                                     372,772
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,345
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        18,607
<OTHER-SE>                                      25,096
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 419,820
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 24,447
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                5,085
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 1,109
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                30,641
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              14,665
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,712
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           15,929
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      507
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 457
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 12,262
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,905
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,596
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,309
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.14
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   10.18
<LOANS-NON>                                        390
<LOANS-PAST>                                       427
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,475
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      254
<RECOVERIES>                                       117
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,827
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          3,827
        




</TABLE>
[No. 485-3.

Division Three.

May 15, 1972.]

#### The State of Washington, *Appellant,*v. Gary Daniel Thomas, *Respondent.*
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 12

                           GTE SOUTHWEST INCORPORATED
              STATEMENT OF THE RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

                             (Thousands of Dollars)



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                      Nine Months Ended
                                                                      September 30, 1996
                                                                      ------------------
<S>                                                                   <C>
Net earnings available for fixed charges:
  Income from continuing operations                                   $       189,489
  Add - Income taxes                                                           93,098
      - Fixed charges                                                          49,221
                                                                      ---------------        
Adjusted earnings                                                     $       331,808
                                                                      ===============
                                                                              
Fixed charges:                                                                
  Interest expense                                                    $        45,110
  Portion of rent expense                                                     
     representing interest                                                      4,111
                                                                      ---------------        
Adjusted fixed charges                                                $        49,221
                                                                      ===============

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES                                               6.74
</TABLE>
#### JAMES J. BOSWELL & CO. *vs.*JAMES C. DUNNING.

In an action on a note endorsed, specially, to a firm, the partnership must be proved.

This was an action on a negociable note, drawn by James C. Dunning, in favor of Richard F. Hastings, payable at the Georgetown *bank,*of the Farmers’ Bank of Delaware, and endorsed to plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs proved the note, endorsement, and protest, and closed.

*Mr. Layton*

moved a nonsuit—1. Because there was a variance in the description of the note, which was payable at the *branch*of the Farmers’ Bank of the State of Delaware, at Georgetown.

2. That the partnership character of the endorsees is not proved.

*The Court*said there was no variance; but if there was, they would at once order the pleadings amended.

They had doubt on the second point, and would take an opportunity to look into it; and there being no further defence, would direct the jury to render a verdict for plaintiffs, for the amount of the note, Subject to the opinion of the court on this point.

*Mr. Cullen*

now asked leave to prove the partnership, which was opposed by the defendants’ counsel, and refused by the court, as unprecedented and dangerous.

Verdict for plaintiffs, $303 00.

*The Court*

afterwards set aside the verdict and entered a judgment of nonsuit, for want of proof of the partnership character of the plaintiffs; the endorsement being special, and not in blank. *(Chitty on Bills,*394; 3 *Cowp.,*240, *Ord*vs. *Portal, note.)*
# C_2020222EN.01003001.xml

| 6.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/30

---

Action brought on 6 May 2020 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (ROCHEM)

(Case T-262/20)

(2020/C 222/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Rochem Group AG (Zug, Suisse) (represented by: K. Guridi Sedlak, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Rochem Marine Srl (Genova, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark ROCHEM — International registration designating the European Union No 1 151 545

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 March 2020 in Case R 1546/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to render a new decision refusing the declaration of invalidity filed against the International trademark registration No 1 151 545, also for classes 11 and 40; |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to render a new decision refusing the declaration of invalidity filed against the International trademark registration No 1 151 545, also for classes 11 and 40;

| — | order EUIPO and the intervener, should the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal appear before the Court, to pay its own costs and bear the fees and costs of the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and the intervener, should the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal appear before the Court, to pay its own costs and bear the fees and costs of the applicant.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 64(2) and (3) in connection with Article 198 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 64(2) and (3) in connection with Article 198 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Manuel YOUNGBLOOD.

No. 61332.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 19, 1978.

Birch P. McDonough, McDonough & McDonough, New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Harry F. Con-nick, Dist. Atty., Joseph Roberts, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SUMMERS, Justice

(concurring).

I concur in the affirmance of this conviction and sentence for the reasons assigned in my concurring opinion in *State v. Ferguson,*358 So.2d 1214 (No. 60,526 on the docket of this Court, rendered April 10, 1978.)
#### Edward Lyn CAROLIN, Appellant, v. Martha Brower CAROLIN, Appellee.

No. 71-793.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 5, 1971.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Palm Beach County; James C. Downey, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Richard J. BEAK, Appellant, v. Vicki F. BEAK, Appellee.

No. 71-248.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 3, 1971.

Howard P. Ross, of Parker, Battaglia & Ross, St. Petersburg, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

*221PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

PIERCE, C. J., and LILES, J., concur.

MANN, J., dissents.

MANN, Judge

(dissenting).

I dissent for reasons stated by Judge Reed in Zakoor v. Zakoor, Fla.App.4th 1970, 240 So.2d 193, and cases therein cited.
IV

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 258

Providing for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 493) to give the President

legislative, line-item veto rescission authority over appropriations bills

and targeted tax benefits in revenue bills.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 27, 1993

Mr. SOLOMON submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Rules

RESOLUTION

Providing for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 493) to

give the President legislative, line-item veto rescission

authority over appropriations bills and targeted tax benefits in revenue bills.

1 Resolved, That immediately after the adoption of this

2 resolution the House shall resolve itself into the Commit3 tee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the

4 consideration of the bill (H.R. 493) to give the President

5 legislative, line-item veto rescission authority over appro6 priations bills and targeted tax benefits in revenue bills,

7 and the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with,

8 and all points of order against the bill and against its con-
2

HRES 258 IH

1 sideration are hereby waived. After general debate which

2 shall be confined to the bill and which shall not exceed

3 four hours to be equally divided and controlled by Rep4 resentative Michel of Illinois, or a designee, and a Member

5 opposed thereto, the bill shall be considered for amend6 ment under the five-minute rule. At the conclusion of the

7 consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee

8 shall rise and report the bill to the House with such

9 amendments as may have been adopted, and the previous

10 question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and

11 amendments thereto to final passage without intervening

12 motion except one motion to recommit, with or without

13 instructions.

Æ