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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF HARBINGER CORPORATION FOR THE NINE MONTHS
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           9,706
<SECURITIES>                                    57,491
<RECEIVABLES>                                   51,812
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,725
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               121,082
<PP&E>                                          54,321
<DEPRECIATION>                                  27,653
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 167,061
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           47,289
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                     119,768
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   167,061
<SALES>                                         31,736
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               113,142
<CGS>                                            3,626
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   37,911
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                62,678
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 14,929
<INCOME-TAX>                                       939
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             13,990
<DISCONTINUED>                                   1,356
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    15,346
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .38


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement Nos. 333-49837, No.333-44436 and No. 333-101962 on Form S-8 of our reports dated June 13, 2006, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of Network Equipment Technologies, Inc. and management's report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Network Equipment Technologies, Inc. for the year ended March 31, 2006.

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San Jose, California
June 13, 2006
Order entered October 3 , 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 22 - 00374 - CV LOCAL PUBLIC HOUSE, LLC, Appellant

V. CARLY PAGE SHOCKEY, Appellee On Appeal from the 416 th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 416 - 05120 - 2019

O RDER Before the Court is ap pellant ’s September 28 , 2022 second un opposed motion to extend time to file its brief. We GRANT the motion and e xtend the deadline to November 14 , 2022

. W e caution app ellant that further extension requests will be disfavored.

/s/ ROBERT BURNS CHIEF JUSTICE
H. Res. 534

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

September 20, 1994.

Resolved,

SECTION 1. RETURN.

The Senate is requested to return to the House of Representatives the amendment of the House to the Senate bill

(S.725).

SEC. 2. CORRECTION.

Upon the return of the House amendment to the Senate

bill (S.725), the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall

make the following change in the engrossment of the House

amendment: Strike section 5 and insert the following:
2

•HRES 534 EH

‘‘SEC. 5. STATE STANDARDS.

‘‘(a) PREEMPTION.—Section 403A(a) of the Federal

Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 343–1(a)) is

amended—

‘‘(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting at the end the

following: ‘except that this paragraph does not apply to

a standard of identity of—

‘‘ ‘(A) a State or political subdivision of a State

for maple syrup which is of the type required by

sections 401 and 403(g), or

‘‘ ‘(B) a State for fluid milk which is of the

type required by sections 401 and 403(g) and which

specifies a higher minimum level of milk components than is provided for in the corresponding

standard of identity promulgated under section

401,’,

‘‘(2) in paragraph (2), by inserting at the end the

following: ‘except that this paragraph does not apply to

a requirement of a State or political subdivision of a

State which is of the type required by section 403(c) and

which is applicable to maple syrup,’,

‘‘(3) in paragraph (3), by inserting at the end the

following: ‘except that this paragraph does not apply to

a requirement of a State or political subdivision of a

State which is of the type required by section 403(h)(1)

and which is applicable to maple syrup,’, and
3

•HRES 534 EH

‘‘(4) by adding at the end the following: ‘For purposes of paragraph (1)(B), the term ‘‘fluid milk’’ means

liquid milk in final packaged form for beverage use and

does not include dry milk, manufactured milk products,

or tanker bulk milk.’ ’’.

(b) PROCEDURE.—Section 701(e)(1) of such Act (21

U.S.C. 371(e)(1)) is amended by striking ‘‘or maple syrup

(regulated under section 168.140 of title 21, Code of Federal

Regulations)’’.

Attest:

Clerk.
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                                   FORM 10-QSB/A

(Mark One)
[X]  QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OF 15 (d) OF THE SECURITIES
     EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period September 30, 1997

[ ]  TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OF 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
     EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from ______________ to ________________.

                 Commission file number 0-27240
                                        -------

                           ECOTYRE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
         --------------------------------------------------------------
       (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)

      Delaware                                        11-3234026
      --------                                        ----------
      (State of other jurisdiction of              (I.R.S. Employer
      incorporation or organization)               Identification No.)

                 895 Waverly Avenue, Holtsville, New York 11742
                  ---------------------------------------------
                    (Address of principal executive offices)

     Check  whether  the issuer (1) filed all  reports  required  to be filed by
Section 13 of 15 (d) of the  Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such
shorter  period that the  registrant  was required to file such reports) and (2)
has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

                           Yes  [ X ]       No [   ]

As of November 19, 1997, 3,492,430 shares of $.001 par value Common Stock of the
registrant were outstanding.

Index schedule found on Page No. 2






<PAGE>

                           SIGNATURES

  Pursuant to the  requirements  of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934,  the
registrant  has duly  caused  this  report  to be  signed  on its  behalf by the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

Dated  :    November 20, 1997        ECOTYRE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
                                     --------------------------
                                     (Registrant)

                                     By: /s/Vito F. Alongi
                                        -----------------------
                                          Vito F. Alongi,
                                          President, Treasurer and Principal
                                          Financial Officer
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1026

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that certain deductions of members of the National Guard or reserve units of the Armed

Forces will be allowable in computing adjusted gross income.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 26 (legislative day, APRIL 19), 1993

Mr. LOTT (for himself, Mr. THURMOND, Mr. D’AMATO, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr.

COATS, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. INOUYE, Mr. BURNS, Mr. KEMPTHORNE,

Mr. SPECTER, and Mr. STEVENS) introduced the following bill; which was

read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide

that certain deductions of members of the National

Guard or reserve units of the Armed Forces will be

allowable in computing adjusted gross income.

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

3 That (a) paragraph (2) of section 62(a) of the Internal

4 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to certain trade and busi5 ness deductions of employees) is amended by adding at

6 the end thereof the following new subparagraph:
2

•S 1026 IS

1 ‘‘(C) CERTAIN EXPENSES OF RESERVISTS

2 AND NATIONAL GUARD MEMBERS.—The deduc3 tions allowed by part VI (section 161 and fol4 lowing) which consist of any of the following ex5 penses paid or incurred by the taxpayer in con6 nection with the performance by such taxpayer

7 of service as a member of a reserve unit of the

8 Armed Forces of the United States or of a unit

9 of the National Guard:

10 ‘‘(i) Expenses of travel, meals, and

11 lodging while away from home.

12 ‘‘(ii) Expenses of transportation to

13 and from home.

14 ‘‘(iii) Expenses of uniforms.’’

15 (b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall

16 apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1992.

Æ
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**Certificationof Principal Executive Officer**

**Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350)**

 

I, Lori A. Jones, of Analytical Surveys, Inc.,certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB forthe year ended September 30, 2005 (the “Report”) which this statementaccompanies fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of Analytical Surveys, Inc.

 
| Dated: December 27, 2005 |
|-------------------------------|
|                          |
| /s/ Lori A. Jones             |   |
| Lori A. Jones                 |
| Chief Executive Officer       |

 

1

----
[No. 275-3.

Division Three.

June 7, 1971.]

#### August B. Schmidt *et al., Respondents,*v. Lloyd R. Hanson, *Appellant.*August B. Schmidt *et al., Respondents,*v. Patrick Phalon *et al., Appellants.*

*Harvey Erickson,*for appellants.

*Richard J. Schroeder*(of *Dellwo, Rudolf & Grant),*for respondents.

Munson, C.J.

Plaintiffs brought a consolidated action to quiet title to certain parcels of land owned by defendants. The trial court found the elements of adverse possession present, quieted title in plaintiffs and defendants appeal. We affirm.

*98The main thrust of defendants’ appeal challenges the findings of fact entered by the trial court regarding the actual and uninterrupted, open and notorious, hostile and exclusive, good-faith claim of ownership by plaintiffs. Our review of the record discloses: Plaintiffs fenced the land in question in 1946; continually and exclusively used same for pasturage until 1968; cleared it of brush on occasion; and in good faith claimed it as their own. Defendants, relying on *Murray v. Bousquet,*154 Wash. 42, 280 P. 935 (1929), claim the fencing of wild land for pasturage for 10 years is insufficient to constitute adverse possession. This is undoubtedly the law absent the remaining elements of adverse possession; however, such is not the case here. There is ample evidence to support the trial court’s finding as to each element.

With regard to defendants’ contention concerning an alleged contravention of the deadman’s statute, RCW 5.60.030,1 said evidence is not necessary to sustain the trial court’s decision. The requisite elements of adverse possession are established by sufficient evidence apart from the allegedly erroneous portion and if the admission of such evidence is error, it is harmless.

Judgment affirmed.

Green and Evans, JJ., concur.

1

 August Schmidt testified that the common grantor to the present litigants drove stakes to mark plaintiffs’ boundary line.
# C_2022064EN.01000701.xml

| 7.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/7

---

Appeal brought on 23 June 2021 by Asolo LTD and WeMO Brands BV against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 28 April 2021 in Case T-509/19, Asolo v EUIPO

(Case C-387/21 P)

(2022/C 64/09)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: Asolo LTD and WeMO Brands BV (represented by: W. Pors, advocaat, N. Dorenbosch, advocaat)

Other party: European Union Intellectual Property Office

By order of 13 December 2021, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Asolo LTD and WeMo Brands BV should bear their own costs.

---
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1176

To clarify the tariff classification of certain plastic flat goods.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 29 (legislative day, JUNE 22), 1993

Mr. KOHL introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to

the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To clarify the tariff classification of certain plastic flat goods.

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN PLASTIC FLAT GOODS.

4 Chapter 42 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

5 United States is amended by inserting in numerical

6 sequence the following new subheading with the article

7 description having the same degree of indentation as the

8 article description in subheading 4202.31.60.

‘‘ 4202.32.05 With outer surface area of not

less than 20 percent leather ...... 8% Free (IL, CA) 35% ’’.
2

•S 1176 IS

1 SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL NEW NOTE.

2 The Additional United States notes for chapter 42

3 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

4 are amended by adding at the end the following new note:

5 ‘‘3. For purposes of subheading 4202.32.10, the term ‘re6 inforced or laminated plastics’ means (a) rigid, infusible,

7 insoluble plastics formed by the application of heat and

8 high pressure on two or more super-imposed layers of fi9 brous sheet material which has been impregnated or coat10 ed with plastics, or (b) rigid plastics comprised of

11 imbedded fibrous reinforcing material (such as paper, fab12 ric, asbestos, and fibrous glass) impregnated, coated or

13 combined with plastics usually by the application of heat

14 or heat and low pressure.’’.

15 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

16 The amendments made by this Act shall apply with

17 respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse

18 for consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date

19 of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
[ DO NOT PUBLISH] 

## In the 

# United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________ No. 19

- 13927

____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus NATHANIEL FIELDS,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 3:05

- cr

- 00037

- RV

- EMT

- 1

____________________ USCA11 Case: 19-13927 Date Filed: 11/29/2022 Page: 1 of 32 Opinion of the Court 19

- 13927

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before W ILSON , R OSENBAUM , and E D C ARNES , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: In 2019, Nathaniel Fields , a federal prisoner, filed a motion for a sentence reduction under § 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018. The district court granted Fields’s motion in part and imposed a lesser sentence. But the court declined Fields’s invitation to recalculate his Guidelines range without a career

- offender designation under the intervening changes to the Sentencing Guidelines. Fields appealed, and we affirmed , relying on our decision in United States v. Denson , 963 F.3d 1080, 1089 (11 th Cir. 2020)

. The United States Supreme Court vacated our judgment inthis case and remanded for further proceedings in light of its opinion in Concepcion v. United States , 142 S. Ct. 2389 (2022)

. Fields v. United States , 142 S. Ct. 2900 (2022)

. Concepcion abrogated our decision in Denson and held that “the First Step Act allows district courts to consider intervening changes of law or fact in exercising their discretion to reduce a sentence pursuant to the First Step Act.” 142 S. Ct. at 2404. A nd because district courts must “consider nonfrivolous arguments presented by the parties, the First Step Actrequires district courts to consider intervening changes when parties raise them.” Id. at 2396. “ By its terms, however, the First Step Act does not compel courts to exercise their discretion to reduce any sentence based on those arguments. ” Id. USCA11 Case: 19-13927 Date Filed: 11/29/2022 Page: 2 of 319

- 13927 Opinion of the Court 3

C

oncepcion instructs that district court s ruling on First Step Act motions “ bear the standard obligation to explain their decisions,” and accordingly must give a “brief statement of reasons” to “demonstrate that they considered the parties’ arguments.” Id. at 2404. “ All that the First Step Act requires is that a district court

m ake clear that it reasoned through the parties’ arguments.” Id. (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted). Here, the district court ’s order indica tes that the court considered the parties’ arguments, including Fields’s argument that changes in the Guidelines weighed in favor of a sentence reduction. But the order does not state whether the court understood that it was permitted to consider intervening changes to the Sentencing Guidelines. See i d

. at 2396, 2404. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment of the district court and remand this case for further consideration in light of Concepcion

.
VACATED and REMANDED. USCA11 Case: 19-13927 Date Filed: 11/29/2022 Page: 3 of 3
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-14-00220-CR

SHAHID KARRIEM ANSARI, III, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 354th District Court

Hunt County, Texas

Trial Court No. 27,739

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ.
2

O R D E R

Shahid Karriem Ansari, III, appeals from his conviction of burglary of a habitation and the 

resulting sentence of seven years’ imprisonment. The clerk’s record in this matter was filed March 

26, 2015, and the reporter’s record was filed May 21, 2015, making Ansari’s brief originally due 

June 22, 2015. This deadline was extended once by this Court on the motion of Ansari’s appellate 

counsel, Jason A. Duff, resulting in the most recent due date of July 22, 2015. Duff has now filed 

a second motion seeking an additional extension of the briefing deadline.

We have reviewed the second motion to extend time as well as the appellate record, and 

we find no compelling information to convince us that this brief requires more time to prepare. 

The motion to extend time to file Ansari’s appellate brief is overruled.

We order Duff to file Ansari’s appellate brief with this Court on or before August 21, 2015.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: July 28, 2015
# C_2022303EN.01004102.xml

| 8.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/41

---

Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Puma v EUIPO — V. Fraas (FRAAS)

(Case T-329/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark FRAAS - Genuine use of a mark - Use in connection with the goods in respect of which the mark was registered - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Proof of genuine use)

(2022/C 303/51)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: M. Schunke, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: V. Fraas GmbH (Helmbrechts-Wüstenselbitz, Germany) (represented by: R. Kunze and F. Tyra, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 24 March 2021 (Case R 2714/2019-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Puma SE to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by V. Fraas GmbH in the context of the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Puma SE to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by V. Fraas GmbH in the context of the present proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 297, 26.7.2021.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-3 Nos. 333-51671-01, 333-51759 and 333-61913, and Form S-8 Nos.
333-38878, 333-12117, 333-29759 and 333-55901) and related Prospectuses of
Highwoods Properties, Inc. and in the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No.
333-51671) and related Prospectus of Highwoods Realty Limited Partnership of our
report dated February 19, 2002 with respect to the consolidated financial
statement and schedule of Highwoods Realty Limited Partnership included in the
Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2001.


                                                      /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Raleigh, North Carolina
March 27, 2002