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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains unaudited summary financial information extracted from
the consolidated statement of financial position of Central Newspapers, Inc. as
of December 29, 1996 and the consolidated statements of income, shareholders,
equity and cash flows for the fiscal year then ended and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-29-1996
<CASH>                                           36149
<SECURITIES>                                     25612
<RECEIVABLES>                                    90023
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1638
<INVENTORY>                                       8912
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                171462
<PP&E>                                          512852
<DEPRECIATION>                                  215872
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  586972
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            79139
<BONDS>                                           2678
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         24322
<OTHER-SE>                                      363228
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    586972
<SALES>                                         620315
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                620315
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   520456
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 618
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 103868
<INCOME-TAX>                                     42431
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              61534
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     61534
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
2015 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

6-1-2015

Musa Sesay v. Attorney General United States

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2015

This June is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University

School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2015 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of

Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Musa Sesay v. Attorney General United States" (2015). 2015 Decisions. Paper 539.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2015/539
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

May 28, 2015

No. 14-2996

Musa Sesay,

 Petitioner

v.

Attorney General United States,

Respondent

(Agency No. A094-244-759)

Present: RENDELL, SMITH and KRAUSE, Circuit Judges

1. Motion by Respondent to amend the decision.

Respectfully,

Clerk/tyw

_________________________________ORDER________________________________

The foregoing motion to amend is hereby granted. Accordingly, in the final 

sentence of footnote 7 on page 15, the phrase “a letter to opposing counsel” is amended 

to read “a letter to the Department of Homeland Security.” 

By the Court,

s/ Cheryl Ann Krause

Circuit Judge

Dated: June 1, 2015

tyw/cc: Thomas V. Massucci, Esq.

Jeffrey L. Menkin, Esq.

Benjamin Zeitlin, Esq.
EXHIBIT
      32




Certification




Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




(Subsections
      (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States
      Code)




Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
      section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
      undersigned officers of Chattem, Inc., a Tennessee corporation (the “Company”),
      does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:




The
      Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended November 30, 2007 (the “Form
      10-K”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the
      Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and
      results of operations of the Company.




Date:  January 29,
      2008




/s/ Zan
                  GuerryZan
                  GuerryChairman
                  and Chief Executive Officer




Date:  January 29,
      2008




/s/ Robert
                  B. LongRobert
                  B. LongVice
                  President, Finance




The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
      the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter
      63
      of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form
      10-K, or as a separate disclosure document.




A
      SIGNED
      ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 HAS BEEN PROVIDED
      TO
      CHATTEM, INC.  AND WILL BE RETAINED BY CHATTEM, INC. AND FURNISHED TO
      THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON
      REQUEST.
**AMERENENERGY
      GENERATING COMPANY****COMPUTATION
      OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES****(Thousands
      of Dollars, Except Ratios)****Period****May
      1, 2000****through****Year
      Ended December 31,**
    
    **December
      31,****2004**
    
    **2003**
    
    **2002**
    
    **2001**
    
    **2000**Net
      income
    
    $
    107,292
    
    $
    75,185
    
    $
    31,837
    
    $
    75,924
    
    $
    43,808Add
      (Less) – Cumulative effect of change inaccounting
      principle, net of tax
    
    
    -
    
    
    (18,416
    )
    
    -
    
    
    1,993
    
    
    -Net
      income from continuing operations
    
    
    107,292
    
    
    56,769
    
    
    31,837
    
    
    77,917
    
    
    43,808Taxes
      based on income
    
    
    64,245
    
    
    38,538
    
    
    20,340
    
    
    47,296
    
    
    27,213Net
      income before income taxes
    
    $
    171,537
    
    $
    95,307
    
    $
    52,177
    
    $
    125,213
    
    $
    71,021Add
      – fixed charges:Interest
      on long term debt
    
    
    55,333
    
    
    55,394
    
    
    45,840
    
    
    34,138
    
    
    5,690Other
      interest
    
    
    37,785
    
    
    45,461
    
    
    39,937
    
    
    41,189
    
    
    29,875Amortization
      of debt discount expense
    
    
    1,497
    
    
    1,495
    
    
    1,377
    
    
    1,059
    
    
    119Total
      fixed charges
    
    $
    94,615
    
    $
    102,350
    
    $
    87,154
    
    $
    76,386
    
    $
    35,684Earnings
      available for fixed charges
    
    $
    266,152
    
    $
    197,657
    
    $
    139,331
    
    $
    201,599
    
    $
    106,705Ratio
      of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    2.81
    
    
    1.93
    
    
    1.59
    
    
    2.63
    
    
    2.99
#### State v. Mitchell

17531

04/16/96

Affirmed
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

November 7, 2008 Revision

Cause number: 01-15-00066-CV

Style: Patrick Olajide Akinwamide v. Transportation Insurance Company, 

CNA Insurance Company, and Automatic Data Processing Inc.

Date motion filed*: April 9, 2015

Type of motion: Motion for an Order to Subpoena the Court Reporter for the Transcript

of Show Cause Hearing in Cause No. 97-48526 on October 24, 2014

Parties filing motion: Pro Se Appellant

Document to be filed: N/A

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted; if document is to be filed, document due:

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________ 

On March 26, 2015, the court reporter filed the reporter’s record for the “Defendant’s 

Motion for Sanctions/and Motion to Determine Plaintiff A Vexatious Litigant” hearing 

held on October 24, 2014, in this Court. Pursuant to the trial court’s order, signed on 

October 3, 2014, the trial court set the show cause hearing for October 24, 2014, the 

same date as the sanctions/vexatious litigant hearing. (C.R. at 148-49). Thus, 

appellant’s motion to subpoena the court reporter to file the show cause hearing 

transcript is dismissed as moot as it was already filed on March 26, 2015, with the

sanctions/vexatious litigant transcript. Appellant’s brief remains due by April 27,

2015. See TEX. R. APP. 38.6(a)(2).

Judge’s signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

 

Date: April 21, 2015
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LYRALISA LAVENA STEVENS,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

VIMAL SINGH; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 13-16953

D.C. No. 2:12-cv-00239-GEBKJN

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Garland E. Burrell, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 21, 2015** 

Before: CANBY, GOULD, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Lyralisa Lavena Stevens, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the

district court’s judgment dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging

violations of the Eighth Amendment, the California constitution, and California

law based on prison officials’ failure to approve Stevens’s request for sexFILED

FEB 2 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
reassignment surgery. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review

de novo, Mpoyo v. Litton Electro-Optical Sys., 430 F.3d 985, 987 (9th Cir. 2005),

and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the action as barred by the doctrine of

res judicata because the parties or their privies already litigated Stevens’s claims in

California state court. See Gonzales v. Cal. Dep’t of Corr., 739 F.3d 1226, 1231

(9th Cir. 2014) (reasoned denials of California habeas petitions have claimpreclusive effect); Kay v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes, 504 F.3d 803, 808 (9th Cir.

2007) (setting forth elements of res judicata under California law). 

We reject as unpersuasive Stevens’s contention that she is entitled to

compensation under various state regulations, and her contention that the district

court’s rulings established that her claims were meritorious.

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam).

Defendants’ motion to strike portions of the reply brief, filed on April 11,

2014, is granted. See Kirshner v. Uniden Corp. of Am., 842 F.2d 1074, 1077 (9th

Cir. 1988). All other pending motions and requests are denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 13-16953
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    Homecommentreply12451Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  Natasha Osborne (not verified)PermalinkMay 9, 2023 - 2:03pmCongrats Donald on this marvelous 50 year anniversary! This story is so fabulous just as you are too. I'll always remember you and how gracious you were when I did my detail assignment in the Front Office of the Service Center, you took your time and showed me many things and it was just a joy to work with you.  You're one of a kind! Thanks and best wishes. I absolutely loved this article about our AOC coworker.
ReplyYour name
Email Address
        The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Comment
About text formats
Plain text
  
  
      
          No HTML tags allowed.
                      Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
                      Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
EXHIBIT 15

                         ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF INDEPENDENT
                          CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
                  REGARDING INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REVIEW REPORT



The Board of Directors
LaserSight Incorporated:

With respect to the registration statements on Form S-8 (nos. 33-96390,
33-52170, 333-16817, 333-16823, 333-62587, 333-62591, 333-84073, 333-84075,
333-42662 and 333-75216) and on Form S-3 (nos. 333-2198, 333-25237, 333-36655,
333-36837, 333-59369, 333-68495, 333-77825, 333-35822, 333-46470, 333-62634 and
333-67616) of LaserSight Incorporated, we acknowledge our awareness of the use
therein of our report dated May 3, 2002 related to our review of interim
financial information.

Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, such report is not
considered part of a registration statement prepared or certified by an
accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning
of sections 7 and 11 of the Act.


                                        /s/KPMG LLP

St. Louis, Missouri
May 15, 2002
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeExplore the Capitol CampusThe Art Collection
From Texas to the Pacific Ocean
        
                  The Basics
      
Artist
      
Allyn Cox

EverGreene Painting Studios

Materials
    Oil on Canvas

Year
    1994

Location
      
U.S. Capitol Building
          Cox Corridors

The map shows the states and territories stretching west from Texas to the Pacific Ocean and marks the Oregon, California, and Old Spanish Trails as well as the Pony Express route. Also shown are Sutter's Fort, where gold was discovered in California; the sites of Spanish missions and forts; and the names of Indian tribes. In the ocean is a clipper ship of the type that sailed around the tip of South America from California to the east coast of the United States.

About the Cox Corridors Murals

The first floor of the U.S. Capitol's House wing is elaborately decorated with wall and ceiling murals by artist Allyn Cox. The western north-south corridor, called the Westward Expansion corridor, includes maps and scenes showing the growth of the United States from early exploration through the acquisition of Alaska and Hawaii. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeExplore the Capitol CampusGrounds Features
Capitol Square NW Cherry Trees
        
                  The Basics
      
Location
      
Near the Summerhouse

                  View on Map

Site of one variety: Yoshino (*Prunus x yeodoensis*). Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
IV 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 218 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the conditions 

for the United States becoming a signatory to any international agreement on greenhouse gas emissions under the United Nations Framework 

Convention on Climate Change. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 21, 2015 

Mr. SENSENBRENNER (for himself, Mr. SMITH of Texas, and Mr. RYAN of 

Wisconsin) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the conditions for the United States becoming a 

signatory to any international agreement on greenhouse 

gas emissions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that the United States should not be a signa3 tory to any protocol to, or other agreement regarding, the 

4 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate 

5 Change of 1992, at negotiations in Paris in December 

6 2015, or thereafter, which would— 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 218 IH 

1 (1) mandate new commitments to limit or re2 duce greenhouse gas emissions for the Annex I Par3 ties, unless the protocol or other agreement also 

4 mandates new specific scheduled commitments to 

5 limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for Non6 Annex I Parties within the same compliance period; 

7 (2) not ensure that all parties to the agreement 

8 reduce an equal amount of greenhouse gas emissions 

9 at an equivalent rate within the same compliance pe10 riod; 

11 (3) result in serious harm to the economy of the 

12 United States; and 

13 (4) not adequately protect United States intel14 lectual property rights. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
120 P.3d 1144

INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I

#### State v. Kekahu

25369

09/14/2005

Affirmed
* 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-60353

Summary Calendar

 

DAVID GRAY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

DAVID TURNER, Superintendent

Southern Mississippi Correctional

Institution; MICHAEL BERNHARDT, Captain,

Southern Mississippi Correctional

Institution; HUBERT JORDAN, Lieutenant,

Southern Mississippi Correctional

Institution; JERRY WALLY, Lieutenant, 

Southern Mississippi Correctional Institution; 

JACKIE LANCASTER, Lieutenant, Southern 

Mississippi Correctional Institution; 

RANDY ANDERSON, Lieutenant, Southern Mississippi 

Correctional Institution; ARTIS BYRD, Sergeant,

Southern Mississippi Correctional Institution; 

ANDREW MILLS; ANN REID, Case Manager; 

SHELIA FANCHER, Deputy Warden,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 2-99-CV-64-PC

- - - - - - - - - -

November 2, 2000

Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

David Gray, Mississippi prisoner # 01440, appeals from the

magistrate judge’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint
No. 00-60353

-2-

for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Gray alleges that the defendants retaliated

against him for filing a prior civil action.

A dismissal of an in forma pauperis complaint for failure to

state a claim pursuant to § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) is reviewed de

novo. See Black v. Warren, 134 F.3d 732, 734 (5th Cir. 1998). 

To establish a claim of retaliation, a prisoner must show “(1) a

specific constitutional right, (2) the defendant’s intent to

retaliate against the prisoner for his or her exercise of that

right, (3) a retaliatory adverse act, and (4) causation.” 

McDonald v. Steward, 132 F.3d 225, 231 (5th Cir. 1998). 

Gray has failed to allege more than his personal belief that

he is the victim of retaliation. Johnson v. Rodriguez, 110 F.3d

299, 310 (5th Cir. 1997). Because Gray has failed to state a

valid claim for retaliation, the judgment of the district court

is AFFIRMED.