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 GIGA INFORMATION GROUP, INC. FOR THE SIX
MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                                     <C>                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           6-MOS                6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1999          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            JUN-30-1999          JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       11,071                4,731
<SECURITIES>                                  2,766                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                10,780               15,116
<ALLOWANCES>                                    436                  431
<INVENTORY>                                       0                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             33,474               28,544
<PP&E>                                        7,218               10,834
<DEPRECIATION>                                2,494                4,738
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               38,527               35,112
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        36,951               45,179
<BONDS>                                           0                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0                    0
<PREFERRED>                                       0                    0
<COMMON>                                         10                   10
<OTHER-SE>                                      763              (10,420)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 38,527               35,112
<SALES>                                      24,830               34,297
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             24,830               34,297
<CGS>                                        14,143               15,893
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                34,479               39,363
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                416                  330
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (394)                (144)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (9,671)              (5,252)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     52                  (26)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (9,723)              (5,226)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0                    0
<CHANGES>                                         0                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (9,723)              (5,226)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.98)               (0.52)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (0.98)               (0.52)


</TABLE>
[Cite as State v. Sexton, 2014-Ohio-3382.]

 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

 TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO 

BUTLER COUNTY 

STATE OF OHIO, : 

 Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2014-02-045 

: D E C I S I O N

 - vs - 8/4/2014 

: 

 

MICHAEL SEXTON, : 

 Defendant-Appellant. : 

CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 

Case No. CR 2013 05 0771 

Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, Michael A. Oster, Jr., Government 

Services Center, 315 High Street, 11th Floor, Hamilton, Ohio 45011, for plaintiff-appellee 

John T. Willard, P.O. Box 35, Hamilton, Ohio 45012, for defendant-appellant 

 Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal, the transcript of 

the docket and journal entries, the transcript of proceedings and original papers from the 

Butler County Court of Common Pleas, and upon a brief filed by appellant's counsel. 

{¶ 2} Counsel for defendant-appellant, Michael Sexton, has filed a brief with this 

court pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), which (1) 
Butler CA2014-02-045

indicates that a careful review of the record from the proceedings below fails to disclose any 

errors by the trial court prejudicial to the rights of appellant upon which an assignment of 

error may be predicated; (2) lists one potential error "that might arguably support the appeal," 

Anders at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; (3) requests that this court review the record independently 

to determine whether the proceedings are free from prejudicial error and without infringement 

of appellant's constitutional rights; (4) requests permission to withdraw as counsel for 

appellant on the basis that the appeal is wholly frivolous; and (5) certifies that a copy of both 

the brief and motion to withdraw have been served upon appellant. 

{¶ 3} Having allowed appellant sufficient time to respond, and no response having 

been received, we have accordingly examined the record and find no error prejudicial to 

appellant's rights in the proceedings in the trial court. The motion of counsel for appellant 

requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this appeal is dismissed for the reason that 

it is wholly frivolous. 

RINGLAND, P.J., HENDRICKSON and PIPER, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**Certification**

 

I, Tommy A. Moore, Jr., certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-K of FirstInvestors Financial Services Group, Inc.

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.     The Company’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the Company andbased on such evaluation:

 

a)     Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared; and

b)    Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report(based on such evaluation); and

c)     Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;

 

5.     The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

a)     Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting, which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

b)    Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

 

Date: Sept 8, 2005

 

 
|   | By:  /s/ TOMMY A. MOORE, JR. |   |
|--------|------------------------------|--------|
|   | Tommy  A. Moore, Jr.    |
|   | Chief  Executive Officer     |

 

----
/ i 7—224.

TWELFTH CENSUS OF THE UNITED STATES. B
i y

EG ae ae “SCHEDULE No. J—POPULATION. = {srrr72usrit FE) shot am

County Cot Sess eee teh t Pedemration District No. HFS.

Township or other division of county— bitte CLeerwo Bes sone eesti aes _..... Name of Institution, —— 2<. cease ess aspen ad :

ee ie a ee rr wien § on wm wn a nn rr rr re

[Insert fftownship, town, precinct, district, or other civil division, as the case may be. See instructions.

Name of incorporated city, town, or village, within the above-named division, a a ira nen cla aay ea, ei i hg aca a aepieiat Litas Baca anes $ DEA re SLT — Ward of city, Fee
Vie aa Vile. VI LE
Enumerated by me on the -.....4f--- —_--..- day of June, 1900, CAL &= ey VA * eee te~ | Enumerator.

State ....<—

PERSONAL DESCRIPTION. NATIVITY. CITIZENSHIP. OCCUPATION, TRADE, OR EDUCATION. OWNERSHIP OF HOME. /
PROFESSION A

of each person TEN YEARS of age
and over.

NAME RELATION.
of each person whose place of
abode on June 1, 1900, was

in this family.
Enter surname first, then the given name and
middle initial, ifany.

LOCATION.

Place of birth of cach person and parents of ouch person enumerated. If born in the United
States, give the State or Territory; if of foreign birth, give the Country only,

—

y

(in

DATE OF

IN CITIES. BIRTH.

or nortgaged,

of farm schedule,

Relationship of cach
person to the head

Place of birth of this Place of birth of Faturn Place of birth of Morurk
PEEson. of this person. of this person.

of immigration to

United States.

ithe),

OccuPration.

INcLUDE every person living on June 1, 1900,
Omit chil born since June 1, 1900,

house, in tho order of

visitation,
_
widowed, or divorced,

Whether single, marriod,

Number of years married,
Number of these children

order of visitation.
Mother of how man
living,
Attondod schovl

children.
United States,

Naturaliration.

employed,

mbor

the
mor

House Number,

Number of dwelling-

Number of family, in the
~ | Number of years in the
% | Mouths not

| Street,

F | Nu

c
aw
~
-]
-]
n
=
ic]
-
an
0
2
=
.
4

@ | Ago «st last birthday.
i

ct | Color or raco,

ne
r]

54

55

56

ey | ere ex feesaltil fomas Ee
69 = Lie :
otidintl Rea

- 60

0 mn lo eee a]. eee we we we wwe en ee a en = ha Bw wen ree

61

62
63

64

65
66

67

68

69

70
71
72
73

yy
‘

75
76
77
78

79
80

| LLG yh Ylere [Yok fal
—a vinelserne Woah, olusalle fete clue fr Neeser set
eee (is aaa LS DES ee
ibe

8)
St 0 |: a a

81
82
83
84
85

u

—— >

86

—— OC * ‘
i 7 i . ‘ | |
f
’
a -
|
-
So
; 4
he < i

|

} ! |
— eee Ss Se sen ns we eee _

f |
wn
‘
- - - wenn 9 ww ee | we eo = ee wee - -- ee ns er ane een — we ww we ew a em oe See ee ee
” .
88 § ; ‘

— —_—_——— eee

: Historic census records are maintained and released by
the National Archives and Records Administration,
not the U.S. Census Bureau.

91

92
93

94

Visit http:/www.archives.gov for more information about publicly

95
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          25,657
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  564,051
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (15,496)
<INVENTORY>                                     92,809
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               960,112
<PP&E>                                       3,169,578
<DEPRECIATION>                               (728,008)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,513,818
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          794,043
<BONDS>                                        669,637
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,347,776
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,513,818
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,297,295
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,070,299
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (1,495)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              23,261
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                220,088
<INCOME-TAX>                                    65,639
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            154,449
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   154,449
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### Farrell FUGETT and Suzanne Guthrie, Petitioners, v. B. J. DRIVER, Judge Circuit Court in and for Pinellas County, Florida, Respondent.

No. 72-151.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 22, 1972.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Henry EDGAR, Sr. et al., Appellants, v. Joseph F. SOLOMON, Appellee.

No. 69-670.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Oct. 7, 1969.

Arthur D. Deckelman, Miami, for appellants.

Pruitt & Pruitt, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and BARKDULL, JJ-

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See: Wilson v. Wilson, 132 Fla. 518, 181 So. 385; Battle v. Butler, 138 Fla. 392, 189 So. 846; Todd v. Hyzer, 154 Fla. 702, 18 So.2d 888; Edmun Realty Corporation v. Kearns, 158 Fla. 558, 28 So.2d 834; Miller v. Murray, Fla.1953, 68 So.2d 594.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

EXHIBIT 11

COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE


                               Three Months Ended        Six Months Ended
                                    June 30,                June 30, 
                               ------------------        -----------------
                               1997         1996         1997         1996
                           -----------   ----------   ----------   ----------
<S>                       <C>           <C>          <C>          <C>
Weighted average number
  of common shares
  outstanding              11,741,459   10,789,014   11,688,968   10,684,064

Shares issuable pursuant
  to warrants and employee
  stock option plan, less
  shares assumed repur-
  chased at the average
  fair value during the
  period (1)                  129,674           -             -            -
                           -----------   ----------   ----------   ----------


Number of shares for 
  computation of earnings
  per share                11,871,133   10,789,014   11,688,968   10,684,064
                           ===========   ==========   ==========   ==========

Net income (loss)          $  526,000  $(1,579,000)   $(105,000) $(1,300,000)
                           ==========   ==========   ==========   ==========

Net income (loss) 
  share (2)                     $0.04     $  (0.15)      $(0.01)      $(0.12)
                           ==========   ==========   ==========   ==========
</TABLE>

(1)  Excluded in loss periods as impact would be anti-dilutive.
(2)  There is no difference between primary and fully diluted net income
(loss) per share.

                                 Page 12 of 12
#### Village of Deshler et al. *v.*The Northwestern Ohio Light Co. etc.

*Supreme Court*— Dismissals—No *debatable constitutional question involved.*

(No. 18560

Decided July 1, 1924.)

Error to the Court of Appeals of Henry county.

*Mr. Fred Gribbell*and *Mr. James Donovan, Jr.,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Mr." H. P. Armstrong*and *Mr. Frank T. Dore,*for defendant in error.

It is ordered and adjudged that said petition in error be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Petition in error dismissed.*

Marshall, C. J., Robinson, Jones, Matthias, Day and Allen, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

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

(18 U.S.C. 1350)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of (18 U.S.C. 1350), the undersigned officer of Electronic Systems Technology Inc., a Washington corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to the best of such officers knowledge and belief, that:

1.

The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the "Form 10-KSB") of the Company 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 Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:  March 21, 2008



/s/ T.L. KIRCHNER

Tom L. Kirchner

President and CEO
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. William E. HUTSON, Jr. v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, et al.

No. 54430.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 22, 1974.

In re: William E. Hutson, Jr., applying for Writ of Certiorari, Mandamus and Prohibition.

Writ refused. The application has no merit.

BARHAM, J.,

is of the opinion the writ should be granted. A fourth D.W.I. offense is attempted to be based upon prior convictions and sentences to imprisonment where defendant was not represented by counsel. The prior offenses are not admissible under Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U. S. 25, 92 S.Ct. 2006, 32 L.Ed.2d 530.

DIXON, J., is of the opinion that the writ should be granted.
#### Edward BRIGHAM, Appellant, v. Lilla BRIGHAM, Appellee.

No. 72-54.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 15, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF UROQUEST MEDICAL
CORPORATION, INCLUDING THE NOTES THERETO, OF SEPTEMBER 30 1997 AND FOR THE NINE
MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      11,241,157
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,148,725
<ALLOWANCES>                                    60,000
<INVENTORY>                                  2,906,257
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            17,637,175
<PP&E>                                       6,491,107
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,943,422
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              34,113,024
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,377,147
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        11,907
<OTHER-SE>                                  28,464,444
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                34,113,024
<SALES>                                     11,947,676
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,947,676
<CGS>                                        6,577,120
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,339,147
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             142,224
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,658,839)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   122,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,780,839)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,780,839)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.23)
        

</TABLE>
### Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA

- 

### 20 06

- 25513 Directorate Identifier: 

### 19 99

- NE

- 61

- AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell

.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement)

Do not include on

condition costs here Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine,

propeller, appliance)

Work

- hours

(include

access, testing,

and close

- up) Labor

cost

(@$8 5 /h

our) Parts Cost Total Costs

(labor +

parts) Number of

U.S.

Registered

Products Total Cost

for U.S. Fleet



### Inspection 0.5 $ 42.50 $ 42.50 

### 25 $ 1,062.50



### HPT Stage 1 dis k

,

average pro

- rated

cos t $ 0.00 $23,053 $ 23,053.00 

### 25 $ 576,325.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.0 0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00



### The known number of products in compliance: 

### 0

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 577,388



### Costs covered under warranty ( if known ) $ 

### 0

On

- Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection,

replacement) Work

- hours

(include access,

testing, and close

up) Labor cost

(@$85/hour) Parts Cost Cost per Product



### 0 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00



### Special considerations for Economic Analysis ( Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table

that was as sumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs) 

### :

### Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES * NO

* Explanation:

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES * NO

* Explanati on:

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? E xplain for

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO

Explanation:

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES * NO



### * Explanation 

### :