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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1999
<CASH>                                         497,335
<SECURITIES>                                   580,476
<RECEIVABLES>                               10,672,610
<ALLOWANCES>                                   102,000
<INVENTORY>                                  4,798,180
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            19,633,375
<PP&E>                                      82,830,738
<DEPRECIATION>                              61,160,255
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              44,170,540
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,622,109
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     9,219,195
<OTHER-SE>                                  23,817,363
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                44,170,540
<SALES>                                     96,144,208
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            96,675,313
<CGS>                                       45,116,645
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               96,333,205
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                27,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,342,108
<INCOME-TAX>                                   466,121
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            875,987
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   875,987
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .07
        

</TABLE>
# Cover Sheet

# Index

# 1-1

# 2-1

# 2-1T

# 2-2

# 2-2T

# 2-3

# 2-3T

# 2-4

# 2-4T

# 2-5

# 2-5T

# 2-6

# 2-6T

# 2-7

# 2-7T

# 2-8

# 2-8T

# 2-9

# 3-1

# 3-1T

# 3-2

# 3-2T

# 3-3

# 3-3T

# 3-4

# 3-4T

# 3-5

# 3-5T

# 3-6

# 3-6T

# 3-7

# 3-7T

# 3-8

# 3-8T

# 4-1

# 4-1T

# 4-2

# 4-2T

# 4-3

# 4-3T

# 4-4

# 4-4T

# 4-5

# 4-5T

# 4-6

# 4-6T

# 5-1

# 5-1T

# 5-2

# 5-2T

# 5-3

# 5-3T

# 5-4

# 5-4T

# 5-5

# 5-5T

# image1.jpeg
Skip Navigation

#         Archive-It      

Login

      - HOME
      - EXPLORE
      - LEARN MORE
      - CONTACT US

### The leading web archiving service for collecting and accessing cultural heritage on the web 

Built at the Internet Archive

        - Explore
        - U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
        - News Releases

#  News Releases 

**Collected by:** U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

**Archived since:**Sep, 2013

**Description:**
This collection includes HHS news and announcements from 1991+.

**Subject:**    	    Government - US Federal,     	    Science & Health

**Creator:**    	    OS/ASPA

## Narrow Your Results

**Creator**

Sort By:
- Count
- (A-Z)
              - HHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (ASPA) (1)

**Group**

Sort By:
- Count
- (A-Z)
              - HHS News Releases (1)

Sites for this collection are listed below. Narrow your results at left, or enter a search query below to		      find a site, specific URL or to search the text of archived webpages.
Clear
            - Date :  2015           X        
            - Date :  2015           X        
            - Categories :  Programs for Families and Children           X        

              - Sites
              - Search Page Text

Page 1 of 1  (1 Total Results)

**Sort By:**
                - Title (A-Z)
                - Title (Z-A)
                - URL (A-Z)
                - URL (Z-A)

### 	  Title:       New rules proposed to improve child care quality, health, and safety    	  

### URL:     https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2015/12/18/new-rules-proposed-improve-child-care-quality-health-and-safety.html

**Description:**	  	New proposed rules to improve child care were announced today by HHS'sÂ Administration for Children and Families.	  

	  	Loading Wayback Capture Info...	  

Loading video data...

**Creator:**    	    HHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (ASPA)

**Date:**        	2015        

**Group:**    	    HHS News Releases

**Categories:**        	Programs for Families and Children        

Page 1 of 1  (1 Total Results)

Archive It

#### Archive-It 

*Built at the Internet Archive*
2014 Archive-ItThe leading web archiving service for collecting and accessing  cultural heritage on the web 

      - Home
      - Learn More         - About Archive-It
        - News/Press
        - Meet the Team
        - Publications
      - Contact Us
Exhibit 11 – Statement regarding computation of per share earnings

 
The following table reconciles the income and average share  amounts used to compute both basic and diluted earnings per share:
 
 
2004
2003
2002
Net        income (loss)
$ 174,820
$ 123,006
$ 213,576 
Basic earnings per share:
Weighted        average shares outstanding
5,104,678
5,098,667
5,098,667 
Diluted earnings per share:
Weighted        average shares outstanding
5,104,678
5,098,667
5,098,667
Incremental        shares from assumed conversion of stock options
        167,933
        37,199
        - 
Weighted        average shares outstanding
        5,272,611
        5,135,866
        5,098,667
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements for the nine months ended December 31, 1996 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         832,576
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  627,351
<ALLOWANCES>                                    17,000
<INVENTORY>                                    486,564
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,114,665
<PP&E>                                       1,661,010
<DEPRECIATION>                                 168,799
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,893,491
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,751,450
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        1,191,590
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,115
<OTHER-SE>                                     584,149
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,893,491
<SALES>                                      1,598,351
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,598,351
<CGS>                                        3,121,370
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,121,370
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,741
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,906,181)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,243
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,910,424)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,910,424)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.83)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.83)
        

</TABLE>
#### John E. McTAGGART v. SOUTHERN FARM BUREAU CASUALTY INSURANCE CO.

No. 46847.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Nov. 6, 1972.

Pogue & Jonas, Aberdeen, for appellant.

Mitchell, McNutt & Bush, Wade H. La-grone, Tupelo, for appellee.

Before GILLESPIE, C. J., and PATTERSON, SMITH, ROBERTSON and SUGG, JJ.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Monroe County; L. T. Senter, Jr., Judge.

Affirmed.
#### Janet Chang, Appellant, v Wilson Chang et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

[655 NYS2d 22]

Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered January 11, 1996 and December 13, 1996 which, in a shareholder’s derivative action, denied plaintiffs motion to set aside the stipulation of settlement between herself and the Chang defendants, and insofar as appealable, denied plaintiffs motion for renewal, unanimously affirmed, with one bill of costs.

No basis is shown for setting aside this open court stipulation of settlement. If, as plaintiff asserts, defendants’ attorney misrepresented to her that the court had "ordered” the parties to settle, or defendant’s financial condition, her reliance thereon would not have been justified. Nor is the stipulation so vague as to be unenforceable or so one-sided as to be unconscionable. Apparently, induced by a belief that any judgment she might obtain against defendants would be subordinate to claims of other creditors and uncollectible, plaintiff, upon advice of counsel, gave up her claim against defendants in exchange for an assignment of their legal malpractice claim, their promise to use best efforts to sell the building that is the subject corporation’s only asset, and a right to 50% of the net proceeds of such sale. Whether improvident we cannot say, but the stipulation certainly is not unconscionable, and plaintiff’s claim that defendants breached the stipulation by not using their best efforts to avoid foreclosure is supported only by conclusory allegations. In any event, since the building has already been foreclosed, the parties cannot be returned to the status quo, and the motion court properly advised plaintiff that her remedy, if any, lay not in rescission of the stipulation but in a plenary action for damages *(Barry v Mutual Life Ins. Co.,*53 NY 536; *Barcia v Barcia,*283 App Div 726). Finally, on her motion to renew, plaintiff did not show a valid excuse for not having submitted the purportedly newly discovered information in the first instance, and, accordingly, renewal was properly denied. In any event, even if the affidavits of plaintiffs relatives were considered, and credited, it would not avail her since, as already noted, she could not justifiably rely on the alleged misrepresentations. We have considered plaintiff’s other *236contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger and Andrias, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-26-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-27-1999
<CASH>                                           8,712
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   41,709
<ALLOWANCES>                                       500
<INVENTORY>                                     71,781
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               179,799
<PP&E>                                         858,860
<DEPRECIATION>                                 489,289
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 640,663
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          105,253
<BONDS>                                        477,762
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       138,756
<OTHER-SE>                                   (208,367)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   640,663
<SALES>                                        406,047
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               406,047
<CGS>                                          384,930
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  384,930
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              24,881
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (40,883)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,063
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (41,946)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (41,946)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-51041 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ESTEBAN GUTIERREZ-FELIX, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-91-CR-227-5-P

- - - - - - - - - - July 13, 1998 Before SMITH, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Esteban Gutierrez-Felix appeals his conviction and sentence for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute cocaine. His challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence is essentially a challenge to the jury’s credibility and weight of the evidence determinations. Since the testimony of Detective Majerczyk was not patently unbelievable or incredible, Gutierrez has failed to show that a reasonable trier of fact could not have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Lopez , 74 F.3d 575,No. 97-51041 -2- 578 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 517 U.S. 1228 (1996); United States v. Bell , 678 F.2d 547, 549 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc), aff’d on other grounds , 462 U.S. 356 (1983). Nor has he established plain error in the district court’s admission of Detective Majerczyk’s in-court identification of him. United States v. Rogers , 126 F.3d 655, 657-58 (5th Cir. 1997); United Stated v. Sanchez , 988 F.2d 1384, 1389 (5th Cir. 1993). He has failed to establish error, plain or otherwise, with respect to the admission at trial of photocopies of his identification documents found at the scene of the crime. United States v. Dixon , 132 F.3d 192, 197 (5th Cir. 1997), cert. denied , 118 S. Ct. 1581 (1998). Finally, the prosecutor’s closing argument did not affect his substantial rights. See United States v. Vaccaro , 115 F.3d 1211, 1215-17 (5th Cir. 1997), cert. denied , 118 S. Ct. 689 (1998).
AFFIRMED.
#### JUSTIS and EGNOR *vs.*LINDSAY.

The writ of certiorari limited to *Jive*years after judgment.

Certiorari to Justice Robinson.

Judgment entered 13th March, 1830. *Scire facias*issued 24th August, 1835.

*The Court*

said, that as to any exceptions which applied to the original judgment, the plaintiff in error was too late, according to the *146decision in *King's administratrix*vs. *Hudson's administrator,*(ante p. 135.) This determined the case.

*Gray,*for plaintiffs in error.

*W. H. Rogers,*for defendant.

Certiorari dismissed.
EXHIBIT 32.1


  CERTIFICATION OF MICHAEL H. MCILVAIN, PRESIDENT, PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
         AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


The undersigned officer of Golden Chief Resources, Inc. hereby certifies that
(a) Golden Chief's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
September 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (b information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of Golden Chief.


Date: March 16, 2006                           /s/ MICHAEL H. MCILVAIN
                                               -----------------------
                                               Michael H. McIlvain
                                               President, Principal Executive
                                               Officer, and Chief Financial
                                               Officer, Golden Chief Resources,
                                               Inc.




A signed original of this written statement has been provided to Golden Chief
Resources, Inc. and will be retained by Golden Chief Resources, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 10607.

#### Ervin *v.*Jackson.

Decided December 8, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of Jackson county.

*Mr. Elmer C. Powell,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Oscar W. Newman,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, Crew, Summers and Spear, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000751683
<NAME> COLUMBIA LEASE INCOME FUND A LP FDS 12/31/96
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          60,959
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   41,372
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,284
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                97,047
<PP&E>                                       1,444,033
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,367,883
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 173,197
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          108,564
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       10,485,690
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                (10,421,057)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   173,197
<SALES>                                        324,458
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               343,771
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,320
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               161,903
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (57,142)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                214,690
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            214,690
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   214,690
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     8.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### Arthur L. BOSWER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-1380.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Aug. 1, 1972.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Lewis S. Kinder, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and J. Robert Olian, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and HEN-DRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant, Arthur L. Boswer, was charged with grand larceny of four lengths of pipe. He was tried non-jury and found guilty as charged. The court imposed a sentence of eighteen months in the state penitentiary.

The defendant has appealed from the judgment of conviction and the sentence. Among the grounds relied upon for reversal is that the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of all of the evidence. We find merit in the defendant’s contention and reverse.

After a careful review of the record on appeal, we are convinced that the evidence adduced by the state was not sufficient to measure up to that degree of proof which is required to establish guilt. The evidence here creates a strong suspicion of guilt, but a mere suspicion, no matter how great, does not warrant a conviction. Davis v. State, Fla.App.1968, 216 So.2d 28. Therefore, the judgment and sentence are reversed.

Reversed.
NO. 07-02-0174-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL C

	JULY 16, 2002

	______________________________

	KARLA L. CARTER AND DOUGLAS E. CARTER, INDIVIDUALLY

	AND AS NEXT FRIEND FOR BLAKE D. CARTER, APPELLANTS

	V.

	STANLEY M. DUCHMAN, M.D., APPELLEE

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 333RD DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY;

	NO. 2001-43911; HONORABLE JOSEPH HALBACH, JR., JUDGE

	_______________________________

Before QUINN and REAVIS and JOHNSON, JJ.

	Appellants Karla L. Carter and Douglas E. Carter, individually as next friend for Blake D. Carter, and appellee, Stanley M. Duchman, M.D.  filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss Appeal on July 3, 2002, averring that they no longer wished to prosecute this appeal.

	Without passing on the merits of the case, the parties’ joint motion for dismissal is granted and the appeal is hereby dismissed.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.2.   All costs having been 

paid, no order pertaining to the costs is made.  Having dismissed the appeal at the parties’ request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will issue forthwith.  

							Phil Johnson

						    	    Justice

Do not publish.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION 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 Day International Group, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Thomas J. Koenig, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to my knowledge:

(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 position and results of operations of the
Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.

/s/ Thomas J. Koenig
Thomas J. Koenig
Chief Financial Officer
May 7, 2004