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

<ARTICLE>  5
                        

                            Exhibit Index

Exhibit No.27.3  Financial Data Schedule (Nine Months Ended September 30, 1996)

<LEGEND>
Exhibit 27.3
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SYSTEMS COMMUNICATIONS, INC. FOR THE FISCAL PERIOD
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO 
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1996 
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1996 
<PERIOD-END>                                    SEP-30-1996 
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                           1 
<CASH>                                                    0 
<SECURITIES>                                              0 

<RECEIVABLES>                                     1,582,626 
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (570,973)
<INVENTORY>                                               0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  3,297,224 
<PP&E>                                            1,727,622 
<DEPRECIATION>                                     (438,837)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   22,704,119 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             7,677,040 
<BONDS>                                             479,991 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0 
<PREFERRED>                                       2,650,025 
<COMMON>                                             10,343 
<OTHER-SE>                                                0 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     22,704,119 
<SALES>                                                   0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  2,882,139 
<CGS>                                                     0 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    (8,342,457)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     (2,089)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 (258,779)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (5,706,760)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1,987,821 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (3,718,939)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0 
<CHANGES>                                                 0 
<NET-INCOME>                                     (3,718,939)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          (.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             0 
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                           SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

I, E. Randall Chestnut, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive
Officer of Crown Crafts, Inc. (the "Company"), do hereby certify, in accordance
with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

1.   The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ending March 30,
     2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
     Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2.   The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Company.

Dated: June 17, 2003


                                     /s/ E. Randall Chestnut
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     E. Randall Chestnut, Chairman of the Board,
                                     President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-28-1996
<CASH>                                             379
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,584<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     15,184
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,834
<PP&E>                                          18,818<F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  53,893
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,213
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           663
<OTHER-SE>                                      28,687
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    53,893
<SALES>                                         92,768
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                92,768
<CGS>                                           70,095<F3>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   87,192
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,488
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 584
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,505
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,150
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,355
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,355
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.13
<FN>
<F1>Net of allowance for doubtful accounts
<F2>Net of accumulated depreciation.
<F3>Exclusive of depreciation, depletion and amortization.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases Miscellaneous
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB11-TPS.22 **Contact:**
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  TUESDAY, JULY 26, 2011 Census Bureau to Update Employment Numbers The Census Bureau's monthly Current Population Survey — which dates from 1942 — is the longest-running household survey in the country. Census Bureau field representatives ask selected households questions  relevant to the U.S. labor force, such as their employment status, hours worked, earnings, age, sex, race, marital status, educational attainment, occupation and industry. From these answers come estimates of the unemployment rate released monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Internet address: <https://www.census.gov/cps>. **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
**Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONI, E. Randall Chestnut, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended April 1, 2007 of CrownCrafts, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Date: June 20, 2007       /s/ E. Randall Chestnut E. Randall Chestnut
The Honorable Bill Nelson United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Senator Nelson: THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590 January 

### 24, 2013

Thank you for your letter supportingthe applicationofJetBlue Airways for two within-perimeter slot exemptions at Ronald Reagan WashingtonNational Airport. (DCA). JetBlue proposesto serve Jacksonville International Airport with one nonstop round trip per day from DCA. We received JetBlue's application onDecember5, 2012. Othertimely applications were received from SouthwestAirlines, proposing one nonstop round trip to Houstonls WilliamP. Hobby Airport, and from US Airways, proposing one nonstop round tripto Will Rogers World Airport in Oklahoma City. As the matter is still pending, I cannot comment onthemerits ofthe points raised inyour letter. However, I can assure you that all applications received by the U.S. Department of Transportation will be given due and careful consideration. The Department's action on this matter is being administered through a publicdocket, which allows all interested parties the opportunity to comment. Following ournormal practice, 

### I am placing a copy ofyour letter and this response in docket numberDOT -OST -2000-7182. I appreciate your interest in this matter.EHLL NLL50N FLOH!ll,\


### The Honorable Ray LaHood Secretary U.S. Depat1ment ofTransportation 1200

### New 1 

### ersey A venue, SE Washington, D.C. 20590



### Dear Secretary LaHood:**WASf~fiNGTON,** DC 20510-0$:105 

### December 17,2012



### I write you to express my support for JetBiue Airways' proposed air service from Ronald Reagan WashingtonNational Airport to Jacksonville International Airport, with continuing service to San Juan, Puerto Rico. Allowing this flight 

### will increase competition for the route and lower ticket prices for consumers. The Washington National-Jacksonville market is currently served by a single carder. The set·vice proposed by JetBiue Airways will provide consumer choice and increase access for small communities throughout the region. Ihope that this competitive, nonstop service canreplace the Spirit Airlines flight vacatingthe slot, which provides service fi·om WashingtonNational Airport to FortLauderdale International Airport. Jacksonville International Ahport is the hub for the rapidly growing seven-countyNotiheast Flodda area. The City 

### ofJacksonville contains fom Fortune 500 

### companies, four**m~or**

### health care systems, astrategicpmt, and**m~oi·** 

### military installations. Jacksonville International Airport served 5.5 million passengers last year, and adding asecond flight fi·om Washington to Jacksonville will ensure the market is able to continue growing. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
250 La. 102

#### Edwin A. WALKER v. The ASSOCIATED PRESS and The Times-Picayune Publishing Corporation.

No. 48512.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 3, 1967.

In re: The Times-Picayune Publishing Corporation applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Caddo. 191 So.2d 727.

Writ granted as to assignment of error Number thirteen (13) — in all other respects the application is denied.

HAWTHORNE, J.,

agrees that the writ should be granted for consideration of assignment of error number 13. He is further of the view that the writ should also be granted for the consideration of assignment of error number ten (10), that is whether Art. 74 of the Code of Civil Procedure is constitutional as applied in this case.

HAMITER, J.,

is of the opinion that this application should be denied in its entirety, the result reached in the Court of Appeal opinion being correct according to his view.
# C_2013366EN.01001001.xml

| 14.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 366/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 366/10

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

(2013/C 366/05)

Image

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Finland

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Finland

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

1

2

Issuing country: Finland

Issuing country

Subject of commemoration: the 125th anniversary of the birth of Nobel Prize winning author F. E. SILLANPÄÄ

Subject of commemoration

Description of the design: The inner part of the coin depicts Sillanpää's portrait. At the top, in semi-circle, the words ‘F. E. SILLANPÄÄ’. At the left, the year ‘1888’ and the mint mark. At the right, the year ‘1964’, the indication of the issuing country ‘FI’ and the year of issuance ‘2013’.

Description of the design

This is a special coin to commemorate the grandfather of a whole nation. F. E. SILLANPÄÄ was a master of style who brought deep insights about the relationship between people and nature into Finnish literature. He was awarded the Nobel prize in 1939 based in particular on the works Meek Heritage and The Maid Silja. This masterful author gained even more national renown with his popular radio appearances and memorable Christmas columns. After the war years, the master writer evolved into the long-bearded ‘Taata’, the unofficial grandfather to the country. From recollections of his childhood Christmases emerged a well-loved tradition: Grandpa gathered the whole nation devoutly around their radios with his easy-going Christmas ‘talks’.

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Number of coins to be issued: 1,5 million

Number of coins to be issued

Date of issue: November 2013

Date of issue

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1, for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

1

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

2

---
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6603

JOHN HAROLD JOHNSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THOMAS R. CORCORAN; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA-98-1952-WMN) Submitted: July 8, 1999 Decided: July 15, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Harold Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: John Johnson appeals the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Johnson v. Corcoran , No. CA-98-1952-WMN (D. Md. Apr. 8, 1999). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Petitioners, v. Norma RAYNEY et al., Respondents.

No. 71-692.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 1, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Certiorari denied.
#### Solomon JELKS, Petitioner, v. BURNUP AND SIMS, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, and the Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents.

No. 36623.

Supreme Court of Florida.

May 22, 1968.

I. W. Williams, of Minnis & Williams, St. Petersburg, for petitioner.

Joe C. Carey, of Harrison, Greene, Mann, Davenport, Rowe & Stanton, St. Peters-burg, Patrick H. Mears, Tallahassee, and J. Franklin Garner, Lakeland, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

By petition for a writ of certiorari we have for review an order of the Florida Industrial Commission bearing date June 22, 1967. Our consideration of the petition, the record and briefs, and oral argument heard, leads us to conclude that the peti*214tions for certiorari and attorney’s fees should be and are, therefore, denied.

It is so ordered.

CALDWELL, C. J., THOMAS, ROBERTS and ERVIN, JJ., and WHITE, Circuit Judge (Retired), concur.
#### In re ESTATE of Julia F. PFEIFFER, Deceased. Geneva McWILLIAMS, Appellant, v. Moyse B. SMITH, as Executrix of the Estate of Julia F. Pfeiffer, Deceased, Appellee.

No. 71-18.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 21, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 30, 1971.

Cushman & Cushman, Miami, for appellant.

Edward C. Vining, Jr., and R. M. MacArthur, Miami, for appellee.

Before SWANN, C. J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This will revocation proceedings has been before the appellate courts of this State several times. See: Miami Bay Oaks Soroptimist Home for Aged, Inc. v. Smith, Fla.App.1969, 224 So.2d 444, cert. denied, Allamong v. Smith, Fla.1969, 232 So.2d 175 and Miami Bay Oaks Soroptimist Home for Aged, Inc. v. Smith, Fla.1969, 232 So.2d 179; Davis v. Smith, Fla.App.1970, 240 So.2d 211. See also: In Re Pfeiffer’s Will, 1970, 34 Fla.Supp. 132. The petition for revocation in the instant action was the seventh one filed, addressed to the will admitted for probate and previously reviewed in Miami Bay Oaks Soroptimist Home for Aged, Inc. v. Smith, Fla.App.1969, 224 So.2d 444. The order under review reads, in part, as follows:

> * * * * * *

> “ * * * it appearing that the present Petition to Revoke is identical in all material respects to the previous Petition to Revoke filed by IVA DAVIS and dismissed with prejudice by this Court’s ■Order of August 21, 1970, and is identical in nature with the five previous Petitions to Revoke the Probate of the Will of the Decedent dated November 10, 1966, which have been previously filed, and after trial of all the issues therein, the various Petitions to Revoke Probate were each denied and such Order was then appealed to the District Court of Appeal, Third District and the Supreme Court of the State of Florida, and said Order of the Probate Court in this cause was held valid. * * * ”

> ******

The appellant puts great stress on this court’s opinion in In Re Estate of Dalton, Fla.App.1968, 206 So.2d 264. We find this case to be distinguishable from the instant cause for several reasons, among which are that the appellant McWilliams was bound by the prior proceedings in this matter because of actual notice of same. Second, Sigley’s point [referred to in the cited case] was whether or not Sigley who did not receive the proper notice to shorten the time for filing a petition for revocation was bound thereby. This is not the issue in the case sub judice.

The action of the trial judge was consistent with the prior decisions of this court and the following authorities. Meyer v. Fogg’s Exr., Fla.1857, 7 Fla. 292; In Re Barret’s Estate, Fla.1949, 40 So.2d 125; State ex rel. Ashby v. Haddock, Fla.1962, *371149 So.2d 552; Biederman v. Cheatham, Fla.App.1964, 161 So.2d 538; State ex rel. Booth v. Byington, Fla.1965, 178 So.2d 1; In Re Tim’s Estate, Fla.1965, 180 So.2d 161; In Re True’s Will, 1968, 31 Fla.Supp. 1; Strickland v. Peters, 5th Cir. 1941, 120 F.2d 53; Compare In Re Meyer’s Estate, 69 S.D. 339, 10 N.W.2d 516. Therefore, we affirm.

Affirmed.
# C_2013106EN.01000101.xml

| 12.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 106/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 106/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6807 — Mercuria Energy Asset Management/Sinomart KTS Development/Vesta Terminals)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2013/C 106/01

On 7 March 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6807. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6807. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---