alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government





---

close


Nigeria
 Basic Facts Population
 People per sq. km
 Males per 100 females
 Children per woman
 Goods exported from U.S.
 Goods imported to U.S.
 Change in exports from U.S. for 2013 to 2022
 A Closer Look Source
 Comparisons
 Compared to the U.S.
 Compared to the World
 K = Thousands
				M = Millions
				B = Billions
  Merchandise Trade U.S. Trade in Manufactured Goods
 Top Exported Goods by U.S. State or Territory
 Population Current and Projected Population
 Population by Age and Sex
 Source and Notes Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Database (demographic data) and USA Trade Online (trade data); Central Intelligence Agency, The World Fact Book (country reference maps). This application presents data for 228 countries and areas of the world with a 2024 population of 5,000 or more. For eleven of those countries and areas, only demographic data are presented. "Data not available" indicates that data are not available from this application.  In such instances, data may be available elsewhere at the census.gov website. Trade figures presented for France do not include data for overseas departments French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Mayotte, and Reunion but do include data for dependencies Saint Barthelemy and Saint Martin.  Trade figures for the United Kingdom include data for crown dependencies Guernsey, Isle of Man, and Jersey. To learn more about world population projections, go to Notes on the World Population Clock. To learn more about international trade data, go to Guide to Foreign Trade Statistics. All trade figures are in U.S. dollars on a nominal basis.


CONNECT WITH US
 Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
  Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
No. 11443.

#### Fox *v.*Fox, by etc.

Decided January 11, 1910.

Error to Circuit Court of Hancock county.

*Mr. James P. Mourer*and *Mr. Jesse Stephens,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. John D. Snyder*and *Mr. Hiram Van Campen,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Summers, C. J., Crew, Spear, Davis and Price, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7630

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff ─ Appellee,

v.

MITCHELL GATEWOOD,

Defendant ─ Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, 

Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:07-cr-00054-RJC-1; 3:08-cv-00182-

RJC)

Submitted: June 30, 2011 Decided: July 5, 2011

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mitchell Gatewood, Appellant Pro Se. Melissa Louise Rikard, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for 

Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Mitchell Gatewood seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record 

and conclude that Gatewood has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
3

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases Governments
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB12-TPS.95 **Contact:**  Public Information Office
301-763-3030
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  THURSDAY, DEC. 20, 2012 Quarterly Survey of Public Pensions: 3rd Quarter 2012 This quarterly survey (formerly known as the Finances of Selected State and Local Government Employee Retirement Systems Survey) provides national summary statistics on the revenues, expenditures and composition of assets of the 100 largest state and local public employee retirement systems in the United States. These 100 systems comprise 89.4 percent of financial activity among such entities, based on the 2007 Census of Governments. This survey presents the most current statistics about investment decisions by state and local public employee retirement systems, which are among the largest types of institutional investors in the U.S. financial markets. These statistical tables are published three months after each calendar quarter and show national financial transactions and trends for the past five years. For more information, please visit <https://www.census.gov/govs/qpr/>. Historical data from the Quarterly Survey of Public Pensions will be available in the Census Bureau's Economic Indicator Database <https://www.census.gov/econ/currentdata/>. **No news release associated with this report. Tip Sheet only.**
  CONNECT WITH US

Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
                   Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
<PAGE>   1




                                                                   Exhibit 21(a)

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT AS OF MAY 31, 1998



                                                             Jurisdiction In
                                                             Which Organized
                                                             ---------------

Bell Dairy Products, Inc.                                    Texas
Bowman Dairy Company, Inc.                                   Delaware
Coburg, Inc.                                                 South Carolina
Cream o'Weber Dairy, Inc.                                    Utah
Creamland Dairies, Inc.                                      New Mexico
Dean Dairy Products Company                                  Pennsylvania
Dean Dip and Dressing Company                                Delaware
Dean Foods Company of California                             Delaware
Dean Foods Company of Indiana                                Delaware
Dean Foods Vegetable Company                                 Wisconsin
Dean Foods Products Company                                  Delaware
Dean Milk Company, Inc.                                      Kentucky
Dean Pickle and Specialty Products Company                   Wisconsin
DFC Transportation Company                                   Delaware
E.B.I. Foods, Ltd.                                           United Kingdom
Elgin Blenders, Inc.                                         Illinois
Gandy's Dairies, Inc.                                        Texas
HMDC, Inc.                                                   Delaware
Liberty Dairy Company                                        Michigan
McArthur Dairy, Inc.                                         Florida
Mayfield Dairy Farms, Inc.                                   Tennessee
Meadow Brook Dairy Company                                   Pennsylvania
Meadows Distributing Company                                 Illinois
Purity Dairies, Inc.                                         Tennessee
Reiter Dairy, Inc.                                           Ohio
Ryan Foods Company                                           Kentucky
Sani-Dairy, Inc.                                             Delaware
Schwartz Pickle Company                                      Delaware
STDI, Inc.                                                   U.S. Virgin Islands
T.G. Lee Foods, Inc.                                         Florida
Verifine Dairy Products Corporation of Sheyboygan            Wisconsin
W.B. Roddenbery Co., Inc.                                    Georgia
WGR Dairy, Inc.                                              Delaware

The names of all other subsidiaries have been omitted from the above list
because, when considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, they would not
constitute a material subsidiary.
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 Annual Report of Daxor Corporation on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, David Frankel, Chief Financial Officer of Daxor
Corporation, 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 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 condition and results of operations of Daxor Corporation

|                     |                         | 
|-------------------- | ----------------------- | 
|                     | /s/ David Frankel       | 
|                     |                         | 
|                     | David Frankel           | 
|                     | Chief Financial Officer | 
|                     |                         | 
|Date: March 31, 2008 |                         | 

---
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1
 
                                  VERITY, INC.
 
           STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME AND LOSS PER SHARE
                    (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                     THREE MONTHS ENDED        SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                        NOVEMBER 30,             NOVEMBER 30,
                                                     -------------------     --------------------
                                                      1996        1997        1996         1997
                                                     -------     -------     -------     --------
<S>                                                  <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>
Primary and Fully Diluted:
  Weighted average common shares outstanding for
     the period....................................   10,814      11,168      10,779       11,101
  Common equivalent shares from dilutive stock
     options.......................................      607          --          --           --
                                                     -------     -------     -------     --------
Shares used in per share calculation...............   11,421      11,168      10,779       11,101
                                                     -------     -------     -------     --------
Net income (loss) applicable to common
  stockholders.....................................  $   222     $(7,159)    $(1,061)    $(16,925)
                                                     =======     =======     =======     ========
Net income (loss) per share........................  $  0.02     $ (0.64)    $ (0.10)    $  (1.52)
                                                     =======     =======     =======     ========
</TABLE>
 
                                       21
NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

2010 Census Results - Municipality Reference Map

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Economics and Statistics Administration U.S. Census Bureau

For more information visit www.census.gov.

ROTA

TINIAN

SAIPAN

NORTHERN

ISLANDS

Municipality

(County Equivalent)

ROTA

±

0 50 mi
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
           This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
           Atlantic Realty Trust's Consolidated Statements of Net Assets in
           Liquidation and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
           such financial statement.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000948975
<NAME>                        ATLANTIC REALTY TRUST

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         24,345,660
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,100,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         37,700,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 63,145,660
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4,316,523
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     58,829,137
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   63,145,660
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   0
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
EX-10.26.2



 Exhibit 10.26.2 

[AHL Letterhead] 
 [for Class A
Award Holders (purchased at FMV)] 
 [DATE], 2016 
 [First
Name][Last Name] 
 Dear [First Name]: 
 This
purpose of this letter is to inform you of certain amendments which have been made to the Class A Share Award Agreement dated as of [●] between Athene Holding Ltd. (the “Company”) and you (the “Award Agreement”).
Please note that none of the amendments impair your rights under the Award Agreement. All capitalized terms not defined in this letter shall have the meanings set forth in the Award Agreement. 

This letter constitutes an amendment of your Award Agreement as follows: 

1)       Section 7(b) relating to Restriction on Competition. This section is amended to incorporate the
revised maximum non-compete periods previously communicated to you. 
 Specifically, the definition of “Restricted Period” is revised to mean a
Participant’s period of service until his or her Termination of Relationship, and thereafter through and including: (A) twelve (12) months following the Participant’s Termination of Relationship with respect to any Participant with a title
of CEO, President or EVP at the time of the Termination of Relationship; (B) nine (9) months following the Participant’s Termination of Relationship with respect to any Participant with a title of SVP at the time of the Termination of
Relationship; and (C) six (6) months following the Participant’s Termination of Relationship with respect to any Participant with a title of VP at the time of the Termination of Relationship. 

2)       Section 7(c) relating to Non-Solicitation of Employees and Consultants. This section is amended
to shorten the period after which an employee’s or consultant’s relationship with Athene and the other Protected Companies (as defined in the Award Agreement) has been terminated before you may solicit or hire such individual.
Specifically, Section 7(c) is revised as follows: 
 During the Participant’s period of service and for a period of twelve (12) months after the date
of the Participant’s Termination of Relationship, the Participant shall not directly or indirectly through any other Person (i) induce or attempt to induce any employee or independent contractor of the Protected Companies to leave the employ or
service, as applicable, of the Protected Companies, or in any way interfere with the relationship between the Protected Companies, on the one hand, and any employee or independent contractor thereof, on the other hand, or (ii) hire any person who
was an employee of the Protected Companies, in each case, until six (6) months after such individual’s employment relationship with the Protected Companies has been terminated. 

*         *         *
        *         * 







 Except as provided in this letter, the Award Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force
and effect. Please keep a copy of this letter together with your Award Agreement. If you have any questions about this letter, please contact [●]. 

Sincerely,
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED OCTOBER 5, 2016

NO. 03-16-00600-CR

The State of Texas, Appellant

v.

Kristen Gonzales-Cedillo, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 7 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND BOURLAND

DISMISSED ON APPELLANT’S MOTION -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction signed by the trial court. Appellant has filed a 

motion to dismiss the appeal. Therefore, the Court grants the motion, allows appellant to 

withdraw its notice of appeal, and dismisses the appeal. The appellant shall pay all costs relating 

to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002**

In connection with the accompanyingQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of VR Holdings, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2013, I, John E. Baker, Chief FinancialOfficer of VR Holdings, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

1. Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for thefiscal quarter ending June 30, 2013, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934; and

 

2. The information contained in such QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending June 30, 2013, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of VR Holdings, Inc.

 

Date: August 19, 2013.

/s/ John E. Baker

John E. Baker, Chief FinancialOfficer and
<PAGE>

                              DECORATOR INDUSTRIES, INC.

            COMPUTATION OF FULLY DILUTED INCOME PER SHARE OF COMMON STOCK

                  FOR THE FIVE FISCAL YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 28, 1996





<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                      1996           1995           1994           1993           1992
                      ----           ----           ----           ----           ----
<S>                <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>
Net income         $3,605,220     $2,414,678     $2,823,770     $2,370,232     $1,528,787
                   ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------
                   ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------
Average number of
 common shares
 outstanding        2,333,972      2,585,568      2,629,295      2,530,471      2,419,783

Dilutive effect of
  stock options on
  net income          177,638        204,609        264,974        361,791        301,415
                      -------        -------        -------        -------        -------
                    2,511,610      2,790,177      2,894,269      2,892,262      2,721,198
                    ---------      ---------      ---------      ---------      ---------
                    ---------      ---------      ---------      ---------      ---------

Fully diluted
earnings per
share:

Net income              $1.22           $.87           $.98           $.82           $.56
                        -----           ----           ----           ----           ----
                        -----           ----           ----           ----           ----

</TABLE>

NOTE: Per share amounts and shares outstanding have been adjusted for a
four-for-three stock split effective June 17, 1996 and a two-for-one stock split
in April 1993.


                                     EXHIBIT 11-L
Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

___________________

No. 98-10445

Summary Calendar

____________________

J. D. IANELLO, doing business as Parkway

Texaco; JOE MERCER, doing business as

Parkway Texaco

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

SPENCER DISTRIBUTING COMPANY

Defendant-Appellee.

_____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(3:96-CV-2999-H)

____________________

March 26, 1999

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appellants J.D. Ianello (“Ianello”) and Joe Mercer (“Mercer”),

doing business as Parkway Texaco, appeal from the district court’s

judgment in favor of appellee Spencer Distributing Company

(“Spencer”), based upon the court’s finding that Spencer satisfied

the notice of termination provisions of the Petroleum Marketing
2

Practice Act (“PMRA”), 15 U.S.C. § 2801 et seq.

Based on our review of the briefs and the record, we conclude

that the district court was not clearly erroneous in finding that

the October 18, 1995 letter addressed to the appellants and sent by

certified mail to Ianello, which contained a statement of Spencer’s

intention to terminate the franchise as of the date of receipt of

the letter, for failure to make payments and for intentionally

selling non-branded fuel, satisfied the notice requirements of §

2804(c) of the PMRA. We decline to impose any hyper-technical

requirements on notices of termination under the PMRA. See Hooper

Oil Co. v. American Petrofina Mktg., No. 83-1050 (5th Cir. Nov. 14,

1983).

AFFIRMED.