alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
TEMPLATE 2 – For Civil Forfeiture Cases Only, Step 2

** Use for moving funds to the USVSST Fund (up to 75% in Civil Cases) after receipt of

final decision from DOJ or TEOAF

[agency letterhead & seal] 

MEMORANDUM FOR JOHN FARLEY 

ACTING DIRECTOR 

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR ASSET FORFEITURE 

FROM: 

SUBJECT: Request to transfer funds relating to

USVSST Fund 

This memorandum is related to our previous memorandum to your office

concerning the 

requested that 25% 

, 

forfeiture, In that memorandum, we

 be transferred to the Treasury Forfeiture Fund, and the rest remain in

the suspense account pending a final determination of the amount that should be

transferred to the Fund for United States Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism 

(USVSST Fund). See Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016, Pub. L. 114-113 (Div. 

O, Tit. IV, § 404(e) (codified at 34 U.S.C. § 20144)). 

account to the Fund for United States Victims

of State-Sponsored Terrorism pursuant to 34 U.S.C. § 20144(e)(2)(A)(2). 

Please see the completed Form 2 disposition package with the necessary information. 

If there are any questions, or in need of additional documentation, please contact 

Attachments: 

Original Memo 

Forfeiture Order or Declaration of Administrative Forfeiture 

TEOAF - Form 2 

DOJ and/or TEOAF Memo Deeming the case or amount eligible for USVSST Fund 

IPAC info for USVSST Fund 

,

At this time, we are requesting the transfer of the funds remaining in the suspense
JUDGMENT

Court of Appeals 

 

First District of Texas 

NO. 01-12-00647-CR

CARLTON CHARLES PENRIGHT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Appeal from the 174th District Court of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 1247950).

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed by the trial court on June 28, 

2012. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly 

raised by the parties, the Court holds that the trial court’s judgment contains no reversible 

error. Accordingly, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.

Judgment rendered September 29, 2015.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Massengale and Huddle. Opinion 

delivered by Justice Huddle.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 222 (Thursday, November 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 69293]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29339]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER00-3774-000]


Adirondack Hydro Fourth Branch, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

November 9, 2000.
    Adirondack Hydro Fourth Branch, LLC (Adirondack) submitted for 
filing a rate schedule under which Adirondack will engage in wholesale 
electric power and energy transactions at market-based rates. 
Adirondack also requested waiver of various Commission regulations. In 
particular, Adirondack requested that the Commission grant blanket 
approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and 
assumptions of liability by Adirondack.
    On November 1, 2000, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, 
Division of Corporate Applications, Office of Markets, Tariffs and 
Rates, granted requests for blanket approval under Part 34, subject to 
the following:
    Within thirty days of the date of the order, any person desiring to 
be heard or to protest the blanket approval of issuances of securities 
or assumptions of liability by Adirondack should file a motion to 
intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 
and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 
385.211 and 385.214).
    Absent a request for hearing within this period, Adirondack is 
authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as 
guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of 
another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some 
lawful object within the corporate purposes of the applicant, and 
compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or 
appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that 
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by 
continued approval of Adirondack's issuances of securities or 
assumptions of liability.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to 
intervene or protests, as set forth above, is December 1, 2000.
    Copies of the full text of the Order are available from the 
Commission's Public Reference Branch, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, 
DC 20426. The order may also be viewed on the Internet at 
http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for 
assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-29339 Filed 11-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
# Official Journal C 402A/19 O

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 402A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6519 October 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 402A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6519 October 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2022/C 402 A/01 | Notice amending the addendum to the notice of open competitions – EPSO/AD/375/20 – Danish-language (DA) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/376/20 – Greek-language (EL) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/377/20 – French-language (FR) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/378/20 – Croatian-language (HR) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/379/20 – Polish-language (PL) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) ( OJ C 444 A, 22.12.2020 ) | 1 |

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2022/C 402 A/01

Notice amending the addendum to the notice of open competitions – EPSO/AD/375/20 – Danish-language (DA) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/376/20 – Greek-language (EL) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/377/20 – French-language (FR) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/378/20 – Croatian-language (HR) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/379/20 – Polish-language (PL) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) ( OJ C 444 A, 22.12.2020 )

( OJ C 444 A, 22.12.2020 )

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN

---

V Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

| 19.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CA 402/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CA 402/1

---

Notice amending the addendum to the notice of open competitions – EPSO/AD/375/20 – Danish-language (DA) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/376/20 – Greek-language (EL) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/377/20 – French-language (FR) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/378/20 – Croatian-language (HR) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/379/20 – Polish-language (PL) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) (1)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 444 A of 22 December 2020
  )

(2022/C 402 A/01)

On page 7, after the last subparagraph of Section 6, the following paragraph is added:

| ‘7. | By derogation from Section 6, for competitions EPSO/AD/376/20, EPSO/AD/377/20, and EPSO/AD/379/20, the procedure for SCBI shall consist of an online meeting with two Selection Board Members who will interview, observe, and assess the performance of each candidate and score the competences covered by the test. No interviewer will be present in addition to the Selection Board Members. The rest of the provisions of Section 6 remain applicable.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘7.

---

(1)  OJ C 72 A, 5.3.2020.

1

---
|                                       |
|---------------------------------------|
|                                       |  |
| Citibank, N.A.                        | Deutsche Bank Trust Company Delaware |
| As ACOLT Indenture Trustee            | As ACOLT Owner Trustee |
| Attn:  Kristen Driscoll     | Attn:  Mark DiGiacomo |
| 388 Greenwich Street, 14th Floor | 1011 Centre Road, Suite 200 |
| New York, NY 10013                    | Wilmington, DE 19805-1266 |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |
|   | Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas |
|   | Attn:  Corporate Trust & Agency Group - |
|   | Structured Finance Services |
|   | 60 Wall Street, 26th floor |
|   | Mail Stop:  NYC60-2606 |
|   | New York, NY 10005 |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |
| Re:    | ACOLT 2015-SN1 - Servicing Agreement |
|   | Annual Statement as to Compliance |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| a. | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period of  March 31, 2015 through December 31, 2015, and of its performance under the ACOLT 2015-SN1 Servicing Agreement has been under his supervision, and |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| b. | To the best of his knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the ACOLT 2015-SN1  Servicing Agreement throughout such period. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
|   | Very truly yours, |
|   |   |
|   | /s/ David J. DeBrunner |   |
|   | David J. DeBrunner |
|   | Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |
|   | Ally Financial Inc. |
TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT: RESIDENTIAL DISHWASHERS, DEHUMIDIFIERS, AND COOKING PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL CLOTHES WASHERS

CHAPTERS

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 2 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK CHAPTER 3 MARKET AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT CHAPTER 4 SCREENING ANALYSIS CHAPTER 5 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CHAPTER 6 ENERGY AND WATER USE DETERMINATION CHAPTER 7 MARKUPS FOR EQUIPMENT PRICE DETERMINATION CHAPTER 8 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD ANALYSIS CHAPTER 9 TRIAL STANDARD LEVELS CHAPTER 10 SHIPMENTS ANALYSIS CHAPTER 11 NATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS CHAPTER 12 LIFE-CYCLE COST SUB-GROUP ANALYSIS CHAPTER 13 MANUFACTURER IMPACT ANALYSIS CHAPTER 14 UTILITY IMPACT ANALYSIS CHAPTER 15 EMPLOYMENT IMPACT ANALYSIS CHAPTER 16 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CHAPTER 17 REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 5AAHAM DATA SUBMITTAL APPENDIX 8AUSER INSTRUCTIONS FOR LCC AND PBP SPREADSHEET APPENDIX 8B UNCERTAINTY AND VARIABILITY APPENDIX 8C LIFETIME DISTRIBUTIONS APPENDIX 10A RELATIVE PRICE ELASTICITY OF DEMAND FOR APPLIANCES APPENDIX 11A USEER INSTRUCTION FOR SHIPMENTS AND NIA SPREADSHEET APPENDIX 11B NATIONAL EQUIPMENT AND OPERATING COSTS APPENDIX 13A THE LOW-VOLUME MANUFACTURER APPENDIX 13B GOVERNMENT REGULATORY IMPACT MODEL (GRIM) APPENDIX 13C FEDERAL PRODUCTION TAX CREDIT APPENDIX 14A INTERPOLATION OF UTILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS FROM NEMS-BT OUTPUT APPENDIX 17A REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS SUPPORTING MATERIAL

TOC-i
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 289

Designating May 6, 1994, as ‘‘African-American Women Positive Role Model

Day’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 9, 1993

Miss COLLINS of Michigan (for herself, Mr. ABERCROMBIE, Mr. ACKERMAN,

Mr. BISHOP, Mr. BLACKWELL, Mrs. BENTLEY, Ms. BROWN of Florida,

Ms. BYRNE, Mr. CANTWELL, Mr. CLAY, Mrs. CLAYTON, Mr. CLYBURN,

Mr. CONYERS, Ms. DANNER, Mr. DELLUMS, Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA, Mr.

FOGLIETTA, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. FIELDS of Louisiana, Mr. FORD of Tennessee, Mr. FROST, Ms. FURSE, Mr. HASTINGS, Mr. HILLIARD, Mr.

HOCHBRUECKNER, Mr. JEFFERSON, Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia, Ms.

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. KOPETSKI, Mr.

KANJORSKI, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mrs. LLOYD, Mrs. MALONEY, Mr.

MARTINEZ, Mr. MCCLOSKEY, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mrs. MORELLA, Ms.

MCKINNEY, Mrs. MEEK, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mrs. MINK, Ms. MOLINARI,

Ms. NORTON, Mr. OWENS, Mr. PASTOR, Mr. PAYNE of New Jersey, Mr.

QUILLEN, Mr. QUINN, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. DE LUGO, Mr. REYNOLDS, Mr.

RAVENEL, Mr. SISISKY, Mr. SLATTERY, Mr. STOKES, Mr. TORRES, Mr.

TOWNS, Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi, Mr. TEJEDA, Mr. TUCKER, Mr.

TRAFICANT, Mr. UNDERWOOD, Mr. VALENTINE, Ms. VELA ́ZQUEZ, Mr.

WASHINGTON, Ms. WATERS, Mr. WHEAT, Mr. WILSON, and Mr. WYNN)

introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

JOINT RESOLUTION

Designating May 6, 1994, as ‘‘African-American Women

Positive Role Model Day’’.
2

•HJ 289 IH

Whereas African-American women have strengthened and

contributed to the United States in every aspect of life,

including art, science, civil service, military service, athletics, education, business, law, and politics;

Whereas African-American women have played an essential

role as heads of households and pillars of proud and productive African-American families, often in hostile social

and economic environments;

Whereas African-American women have ably assumed community, regional, national, and international leadership

roles, thereby achieving well-deserved recognition for

their contributions and achievements; and

Whereas African-American women continue to serve as

strong, positive role models for the young within their

communities, as well as throughout the Nation and the

world: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That May 6, 1994, is designated as ‘‘African-American

4 Women Positive Role Model Day’’, and the President is

5 authorized and requested to issue a proclamation calling

6 on the people of the United States to observe such day

7 with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

Æ
Filed 8/29/13 P. v. Warren CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts a nd parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

ELBERT WARREN,

Defendant and Appellant. 2d Crim. No. B247589 (Super. Ct. No. 2010006608) (Ventura County)

Elbert Warren appeals a February 6, 2013 motion to recall his sentence after appellant was convicted by jury of di ssuading a witness (Pen. Code, § 136.1, subd. (a)(1)) 1 and the jury found that appellant had su ffered a prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)). Appellant was sentenced as a three strikes offender to 25 years to life state prison plus a consecutive term of five years on the prior serious felony enhancement (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)). We affirmed the c onviction in an unpublis hed opinion on May 16, 2012. (B230028.) On February 4, 2013, appellant f iled a motion to recall his sentence pursuant to Proposition 36 (§ 1170.126). The tr ial court denied the motion on the ground

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code.2 that appellant's conviction was for a serious felony (§ 1192.7, subd. (c)(37)) and appellant does meet the criteria for resentencing (§ 1170.26, subd. (e)(1)). We appointed counsel to represent appe llant in this appeal. After counsel's examination of the record, she filed an opening brief raising no issues. On June 10, 2013, we a dvised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished to raise on appeal. We have not received a response.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that appellant's attorney has fully complied w ith her responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. ( People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.) The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

YEGAN, J.

We concur:

GILBERT, P.J.

PERREN, J.3 Patricia M. Murphy, Judge

Superior Court County of Ventura

______________________________

California Appellate Project, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, Jonathan B. Steiner, Executor Director, Susa n E. Hier, Staff Attorney, for Appellant.

No appearance for Respondent.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

JENNIFER VANDERSTOK, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

MERRICK GARLAND, in his official

capacity as Attorney General of the United States;

et al.,

Defendants.

Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-00691-O

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO EXPAND

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Before the Court is a Request to Expand Preliminary Injunction filed by Plaintiffs Jennifer

VanDerStok; Michael G. Andren; Tactical Machining, LLC; and Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc.

(“Plaintiffs”).

Upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Request, it is hereby ORDERED that the Request is

GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that Defendants and their officers, agents, and employees are

enjoined from implementing or enforcing the regulations established or amended by the

Department of Justice and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives’ Final Rule

entitled Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms (“Final Rule”), 87 Fed.

Reg. 24,652 (Apr. 26, 2022), including the Corrections to the Final Rule entitled Definition of

“Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms; Corrections, 78 Fed. Reg. 51,249 (Aug. 19,

2022).

//

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 62 Filed 09/08/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 868
2

Signed this _______________, 2022.

_____

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE REED O’CONNOR

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 62 Filed 09/08/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 869
1 In The



### Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO

. 09

- 1 5

- 00 414

- C V



### ____________________

IN THE ESTATE OF UDIE EDINBURGH

________ ________________________________________________________________

On A ppeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No

. 13

- 30011

- P

________ ________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Ronald Ray Edinburgh filed a notice of appeal October 12, 2015. On

October 21, 2015, we notified the appellant that the notice of appeal was defective,

in that it fails to state the date of the judgment or order appealed from and it does

not show that it w as served on the opposing party. We also notified the appellant

that he could file an amended notice of appeal and that if the original notice of

appeal was filed late he could request an extension of time for late filing

.

Additionally, we notified the appellant that if he wishes to proceed without

prepayment of costs, he must file a declaration of indigence, an inmate trust2 account statement, and a declaration of previous filings. Finally, we warned the

appellant that his appeal would be dismissed unless we received a written reply by

November 6, 2015.

The appellant failed to respond to a notice from the clerk requiring a

response within a specified time. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). W e dismiss the

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3.

APPEAL DISMISS ED.

________________________________ STEVE McKEITHEN

Chief Justice

Submitted on December 9, 2015

Opinion Delivered December 10, 2015

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.
Case 4:22-cr-00230-Y Document 35 Filed 08/31/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 63
Case 4:22-cr-00230-Y Document 35 Filed 08/31/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 64
|                                                                                            
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                            
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                              
|View History: Annual                                                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                        
|View History:                                                                               
|                                                                                            
|Pennsylvania Refinery Alkylates Production Capacity as of January 1 (Barrels per Stream Day)
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|Pennsylvania Refinery Alkylates Production Capacity as of January 1 (Barrels per Stream Day)
|                                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 42,700 | 43,500 | 43,500 | 43,500 | 44,000 | 44,000 | 45,500 | 47,000
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 47,000 | 51,000 | 51,500 | 51,000 | 51,000 | 51,500 | NA     | 33,300 | NA     | 55,322
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 55,300 | 54,100 | 54,100 | 54,100 | 54,100 | 54,100 | 54,100 | 54,100 | 54,100 | 54,100
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 54,100 | 54,500 | 30,500 | 42,500 | 42,500 | 42,500 | 42,500 | 43,000 | 43,000 | 43,000
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 24,000 | 16,500 | 16,500 | 16,500 | 16,500 |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 6/14/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: June 2025
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                       5
<CIK>                           0000941914
<NAME>                          Smithway Motor Xpress Corp.
<MULTIPLIER>                    1000                 
<CURRENCY>                      US Dollars                 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997              
<PERIOD-START>                  JUL-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                    SEP-30-1998               
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                 1.0
<CASH>                          1436               
<SECURITIES>                    0              
<RECEIVABLES>                   17348               
<ALLOWANCES>                    81
<INVENTORY>                     1348               
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                21708               
<PP&E>                          101477
<DEPRECIATION>                  24944               
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  103379
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           14032               
<BONDS>                         45271
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        50
<OTHER-SE>                      33788
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    103379
<SALES>                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                116650
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   108233
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              1967
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 6450
<INCOME-TAX>                    2682
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             3768
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    3768
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   .75
<EPS-DILUTED>                   .75               
        


</TABLE>