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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-27-1997             SEP-27-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997             JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                               0                  92,751
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0               1,190,026
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                  20,160
<INVENTORY>                                          0               3,550,442
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0               4,968,289
<PP&E>                                               0               3,963,125
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0               2,767,822
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0               6,366,155
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                 805,377
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                  21,243
<OTHER-SE>                                           0               4,067,589
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0               6,366,155
<SALES>                                      2,277,240               8,139,492
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                        1,511,003               5,358,005
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  485,827               1,526,087
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,000                   9,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              21,136                  64,363
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                268,472               1,216,738
<INCOME-TAX>                                   107,000                 493,600
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   161,472                 723,138
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .08                     .36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 17

- 00036

- CV

Ex parte J.J. §

§

§

§ From the 235th District Court

of Cooke County (CV16

- 00300)

July 12, 2018

Opinion by Justice Kerr



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case an d holds that

there was error in the trial court’s order . It is ordered that the trial court’s

expunction order is reversed and we render judgment denying Appellee J.J.’s

expunction petition. It is further ordered that all documents that were turned over

to the trial court or to J.J. by law

- enforcement agencies in compliance with the

expunction order must be returned to the submitting agencies.

It is ordered that J.J. shall pay all of the costs of this appeal , for which let

execution issueSECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By

__ /s/ Elizabeth Kerr

_________________ Justice Elizabeth Kerr
# Annual Man-Hour Watch Requirements - Steam Generating Plant (High Pressure)

                - Title:  Annual Man-Hour Watch Requirements - Steam Generating Plant (High Pressure) 
                - Form #:         GSA2104A      
                - Current Revision Date:  10/1981
                - Authority or Regulation:  

PDF versions of forms use Adobe      ReaderTM.      Download Adobe ReaderTM

Search for another form

Print PageEmail Page

Top
<PAGE>   1



                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

GTE South Incorporated
STATEMENT OF THE RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

(Thousands of Dollars)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                              Six Months Ended
                                               June 30, 1998
                                              ----------------
<S>                                            <C>     
Net earnings available for fixed charges:
  Income before extraordinary charge             $143,974
  Add - Income taxes                               91,279
        - Fixed charges                            34,988
                                                 --------
Adjusted earnings                                $270,241
                                                 ========

Fixed charges:
  Interest expense                               $ 30,081
  Portion of rent expense
      representing interest                         4,907
                                                 --------
Adjusted fixed charges                           $ 34,988
                                                 ========

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES                   7.72
</TABLE>
#### INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONIC SUPPLY, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. THEATRE GUILD, INC., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11518.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.

Nov. 17, 1970.

John S. Stephens, Coushatta, for defendant-appellant.

C. P. Brocato, Shreveport, for plaintiff-appellee.

Before BOLIN, PRICE and HEARD, JJ.

BOLIN, Judge.

Appellant having neither appeared nor filed a brief prior to the date fixed for the submission of this case, the appeal is considered abandoned and is dismissed. Rule VII, Sec. 5(b), Uniform Rules of the Courts of Appeal, as revised July 1, 1963, Louisiana Revised Statutes, Vol. 8, page 392.
EXHIBIT NO. 32.2

WRITTEN STATEMENT

 PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

 

The undersigned, Shawn M. Harrington, the Chief Financial Officer of Gerber Scientific, Inc. (the "Company"), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, hereby certifies that:

(i)	the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended July 31, 2003 of the Company (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Dated:  September 11, 2003

/s/ Shawn M. Harrington
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-50625 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOSE LUIS ESTRADA-GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant;

____________________ Consolidated with No. 00-50712

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GERMAN GALAVIS-ACOSTA, Defendant- Appellant;

____________________ Consolidated with No. 00-50729

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versusJESUS ELIAS MENDOZA-CASTANEDA, also known as Lucio HernandezGarcia Defendant-Appellant;No. 00-50625 c/w Nos. 00-50712 & 00-50729 & 00-50788

- 2 -

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. ____________________ Consolidated with No. 00-50766

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RAFAEL TALAVERA-ROSAS, Defendant-Appellant.

____________________ Consolidated with No. 00-50788

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GUSTAVO CALDERA-ROMERO, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

- - - - - - - - - - February 15, 2001
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *No. 00-50625 c/w Nos. 00-50712 & 00-50729 & 00-50788

- 3 - Jose Luis Estrada-Garcia, German Galavis-Acosta, Jesus EliasMendoza-Castaneda, Rafael Talavera-Rosas, and Gustavo CalderaRomero (collectively the Defendants) appeal their sentences following their guilty plea convictions for illegal re-entry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. The Defendants argue that their sentences should not have exceeded the two-year maximum sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). The Defendants acknowledge that their argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but they seek to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 120 S. Ct. 2348 (2000). The Defendants’ argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , 523 U.S. at 235. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that the judgments of the district court be affirmed and that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is granted. AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
DISMISS and Opinion Filed November 22, 2022 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-22-00608-CV CITY OF MCKINNEY, TEXAS, AND BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR CITY OF MCKINNEY, Appellants V. COWTOWN REDI MIX, INC., AND I SSAM AL-SHMAISANI, Appellees On Appeal from the 401st Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 401-05217-2020 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Burns, Justi ce Molberg, and Justice Goldstein Opinion by Chief Justice Burns Before the Court are appellants’ a nd appellees’ respective petitions for permissive appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 28.3. The parties seek to appeal the trial court’s interlocutory order granting in part and denying in part plaintiffs’ motion and defendants’ cross-motion for partial summary judgment. Under section 51.014(d) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, we may accept a permissive interlocutory appeal if (1) the order being appealed involves a controlling question of law as to which th ere is a substantial ground for difference of opinion, and (2) an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the–2– ultimate termination of the litigation. See T EX
. C IV
. P RAC
. & R EM
. C ODE § 51.014(d), (f). Based on our review of the petitions and the record before us , we conclude that the parties have failed to establish that an immediate appeal might immediately advance the ultimate termination of the litig ation. Accordingly, we deny the petitions and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See T EX
. C IV
. P RAC
. & R EM
. C ODE A NN . § 51.014(f); T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 28.3, 42.3(a).

220608F.P05 /Robert D. Burns, III / ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
CITY OF MCKINNEY, TEXAS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR CITY OF MCKINNEY, Appellants
No. 05-22-00608-CV V. COWTOWN REDI MIX, INC, ISSAM AL-SHMAISANI, Appellees On Appeal from the 401st Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 401-05217- 2020. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Burns. Justices Molberg and Goldstein participating.

In accordance with this Court’s op inion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that each party bear its own costs of this appeal.
Judgment entered this 22nd day of November 2022.
Speciation of Natural Gas and 

Condensate

Courtesy of Cynthia Madison, 

Wyoming DEQ
EXTENDED HYDROCARBON ANALYSIS of NATURAL GAS
EXTENDED EXTENDED HYDROCARBON ANAL HYDROCARBON ANALYSIS of CONDENSA of CONDENSATE
MEMORANDUM 

DATE: 11/12/14

TO: Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR–2013-0602

FROM: Ray Saracino, EPA Region 9

SUBJECT: November 6, 2014 Meeting with Arizona Officials and Stakeholders Regarding 

Proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants

SUMMARY

A meeting was held between EPA and the attendees listed below on November 6, 2014 to

discuss the proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants. The Clean Power Plan for 

Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014 and published in the Federal Register on 

June 18, 2014.

ATTENDEES

External Stakeholders

ADEQ: Eric Massey, Steve Burr

Tucson Electric Power: Erik Bakken, Jeff Yockey, Mike Sheehan

Salt River Project: Kara Montalvo, Barbara Sprungl, Grant Smedley

Arizona Corporation Commission: Steve Olea, Margaret ‘Toby’ Little, Ed Stoneburg, B Gray, 

and Lori Lustig 

Arizona Electric Power Coop: Logan Gernet

Arizona Public Service: Ann Becker, Nancy Nesky, Paul Smith, Charles Spell

Tristate: Brian Nelson, Andy Berger

Sierra Southwest Co-op: Michelle Freeark

Jordan, Bischoff & Hiser: Eric Hiser

Tai Wallace

Maureen Scott

Harry Sauthoff

EPA

Erika Wilson, Office of Atmospheric Programs (OAP)

Misha Adamantiades, OAP

Christian Fellner, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS)

Colin Boswell, OAQPS

David Solomon, OAQPS

Angela Shatas, OAQPS

Chris Sherry, OAP

Matt Clouse, OAP

Jeremy Mark, OAP
Amy Zimpfer, Associate Director R9 Air Division

Ray Saracino, R9

Anita Lee, R9

Attachment 

filename: 111(d) Docket Memo Attachment _141017 AZ 111d Questions EPA HQ Follow-Up
# C_2022359EN.01006001.xml

| 19.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 359/60 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 359/60

---

Order of the President of the Court of 15 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag, zittingsplaats's-Hertogenbosch — Netherlands) — G v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid

(Case C-614/21) (1)

(2022/C 359/68)

Language of the case: Dutch

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         54,959
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  52,617
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1,688
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               121,050
<PP&E>                                         4,060,391
<DEPRECIATION>                                 168,508
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 4,247,700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          125,168
<BONDS>                                        1,906,216
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    384,997
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,831,319
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   4,247,700
<SALES>                                        496,739
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               511,478
<CGS>                                          154,211
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  245,608
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               20,776
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             93,959
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                151,135
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            155,135
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                387
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   120,656
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  1.86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.85
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

**(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**

 

In connection with the accompanying quarterly report of GIANT GROUP, LTD. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30,2003 (the “Quarterly Report”), I, Pasquale A. Ambrogio, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

 

(1) The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

 

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

 

Dated: August 14, 2003 

 

/s/    PASQUALE A. AMBROGIO

----
# C_2020114EN.01001801.xml

| 6.4.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.4.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/18

---

Action brought on 17 February 2020 — Albert Darboven Holding v EUIPO (WINDSOR-CASTLE)

(Case T-93/20)

(2020/C 114/19)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Albert Darboven Holding GmbH & Co. KG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: A. Thünken, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU word mark ‘WINDSOR-CASTLE’ — Application for registration No 17 881 910

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 December 2019 in Case R 2448/2018-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | alter the contested decision to the effect that EU trade mark application No 17 881 910 ‘WINDSOR-CASTLE’ be allowed to proceed to publication also in respect of the goods ‘Coffee, tea and substitutes therefor; baked goods and confectionery’;
  in the alternative, |
| --- | --- |

—

alter the contested decision to the effect that EU trade mark application No 17 881 910 ‘WINDSOR-CASTLE’ be allowed to proceed to publication also in respect of the goods ‘Coffee, tea and substitutes therefor; baked goods and confectionery’;

in the alternative,

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
THE STATE OF TEXAS

MANDATE

TO THE 367TH DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 1st 

day of October, A.D. 2013, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was 

determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

RPI Denton Center, Ltd., Appellant

v.

Troy Brown and Albert Smith, Appellee

No. 06-13-00035-CV

Trial Court No. 2012-50206-367

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 further order that the appellant, RPI Denton Center, Ltd., pay all costs of this appeal.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this 

behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said Court of Appeals, with 

the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Texarkana, this the 13th day of March, A.D. 2015.

DEBRA K. AUTREY, Clerk
EXHIBIT 32.2CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of SkillSoft Public Limited Company (the“Company”) for the period ended January 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Thomas J. McDonald, Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to hisknowledge:     (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and     (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated: March 31, 2008                   /s/ THOMAS J. MCDONALD   Thomas J. McDonald   Chief Financial Officer
# C_2022276EN.01000201.xml

| 18.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 276/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 276/2

---

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 June 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo — Portugal) — Petróleos de Portugal — Petrogal, SA v Secretário de Estado dos Assuntos Fiscais

(Case C-706/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Requirement to set out the legal context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for a reply to the questions referred - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2022/C 276/02)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Petróleos de Portugal — Petrogal, SA

Defendant: Secretário de Estado dos Assuntos Fiscais

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling made by the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Supreme Administrative Court, Portugal), by decision of 27 October 2021, is manifestly inadmissible.

---

(1)  Date lodged: 24.11.2021.

---
#### The State, ex rel. Grant, *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio.

*Mandamus*— Award *of workmen's compensation*— Remedy *of claimant*— Continuing *jurisdiction of Industrial Commission —Section 1465-86, General Code.*

(No. 18235

Decided April 15, 1924.)

In Mandamus.

*Mr. George H. Phelps,*for relator.

*Mr. C. C. \Crabbe,*attorney general, and *Mr. R. R. Zutfmehly,*for respondent.

By the Court.

This is an original action in mandamus filed in this court praying that the Industrial Commission he ordered to make am award in- favor of relator of an amount greater than that made by the Commission upon a hearing duly had before the Commission, from which no appeal was taken. It is claimed by relator that the injuries received by him resulted in the loss of his right arm, and relator further claims that the Commission só found, and so notified relator, but that the award is only in an amount sufficient to compensate him for the loss of a hand. The answer of the Commission alleges that the finding was that the relator had only suffered injuries resulting in the loss of the use of his right hand, and further alleges “that it will from time to time make such change or modification of any awards heretofore made according to the facts supported by the evidence placed before it or ascertained by *188it in connection with this said claim.” Inasmuch as the Commission has continuing jurisdiction by virtue of Section 1465-86, General Code, this court is of the opinion that relator has an adequate remedy at law and that he should be remitted to a further hearing before the Commission under its continuing jurisdiction. The writ of mandamus will therefore be denied.

*Writ denied.*

Marshall, C. J., Robinson, Jones, Matthias, Ray and Allen, JJ., concur.

Wanamaker, J., not participating.
#### James B. HOWELL, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. R-13.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 23, 1972.

Rehearing Denied April 25, 1972.

Certiorari Denied June 30, 1972.

James B. Howell, in pro per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Reeves Bowen, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied. See Howell v. State, 238 So.2d 149 (Fla.App.1970).

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and RAWLS and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.