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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          21,315                  84,954
<SECURITIES>                                   115,497                 292,008
<RECEIVABLES>                                      247                   4,383
<ALLOWANCES>                                        50                     367
<INVENTORY>                                        340                   4,071
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               139,758                 400,337
<PP&E>                                          25,854                 195,322
<DEPRECIATION>                                     540                  13,070
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 171,726                 685,424
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,789                  63,178
<BONDS>                                        157,937                 505,807
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            6,567                      42
<PREFERRED>                                         17                       0
<COMMON>                                             8                      78
<OTHER-SE>                                     (6,772)                 116,209
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   171,726                 685,424
<SALES>                                            528                  11,089
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   528                  11,089
<CGS>                                            4,695                  68,161
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   28,929                 200,254
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (5,846)                (22,822)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,779                  52,537
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (36,334)               (218,880)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (36,334)               (218,880)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    36,334                 218,880
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (12.18)                  (4.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (12.18)                  (4.15)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS RESTATED SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
AMENDED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF NATIONAL DIAGNOSTICS, INC. FOR THE THREE MONTHS 
ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          28,107
<SECURITIES>                                 2,000,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,211,948
<ALLOWANCES>                                   601,350
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,837,437
<PP&E>                                       9,974,924
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,905,968
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,394,814
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,604,298
<BONDS>                                        753,756
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,475,260
<COMMON>                                         1,936
<OTHER-SE>                                    (440,436)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,394,814
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,797,303
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,231,119
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,315,506
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             155,540
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 95,138
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    95,138
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (7.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

TRDS 441 Hector Associates, LP, :

Appellant :

:

v. : No. 1316 C.D. 2022

:

Conshohocken Zoning Hearing :

Board :

PER CURIAM O R D E R

NOW, August 24, 2023, having considered Appellant’s application for 

reargument and Appellee OPS Realty Holding LLC’s answer in response thereto, 

the application is DENIED.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CARLOS GARAU; OLGA H. GARAU,

Plaintiffs

- Appellants,

v.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF ’ S DEPARTMENT, Court Services Division, Civil Management Bureau; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 20

- 56086

D.C. No. 2:20

- cv

- 01273

- CJC

- PLA

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California Cormac J. Carney, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 19, 2022 * *

Before: SILVERMAN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Carlos Garau and Olga H. Garau appeal from the district court ’ s judgment

dismissing their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging claims arising out of their state

court unlawful detainer proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). The appellants’ request for oral argument, set forth in the opening brief, is denied. 

# FILED

JAN 25 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 56086

§ 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

12(b)(1) for lack of subject

- matter jurisdiction on t he basis of the Rooker

- Feldman

doctrine. Wolfe v. Strankman , 392 F.3d 358, 362 (9th Cir. 2004)

. We affirm.

T he district court properly dismissed appellants’ claims because they are a

“ forbidden de facto appeal ” of state court unlawful detainer proceedings and raise

issues that are “ inextricably intertwined ” with those proceedings. Noel v. Hall , 341

F.3d 1148, 115 8, 1163 (9th Cir. 2003) ( discussing the Rooker

- Feldman doctrine) ;

see also Cooper v. Ramos , 704 F.3d 772, 779 (9th Cir. 2012) (claims are

“ inextricably intertwined ” for purposes of the Rooker

- Feldman doctrine where “ the

relief requested in the federal action would effectively reverse the state court

decision or void its ruling ” (citation and in ternal quotation marks omitted)) ; Craig

v. State Bar of Cal. , 141 F.3d 1353, 1355 n.3 (9th Cir

. 1998) (“ The fact that the

California Supreme Court denied [plaintiff’s] petition for review without comment

does not mean that no adjudication occurred. ”)

.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellants leave to

amend their claims because amendment would have been futile. See Gordon v.

City of Oakland , 627 F.3d 1092, 1094 (9th Cir. 2010) (setting forth standard of

review and explaining tha t leave to amend may be denied if amendment would be

futile).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in taking judicial notice. See3 20

- 56086

Fed. R. Evid. 201; Lee v. City of Los Angeles , 250 F.3d 668, 689 (9th Cir. 2001)

(standard of review).

A ppellants ’ motion to take judicial notice of state court records (Docket

Entry No. 26) is granted.

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          49,788
<SECURITIES>                                    29,512
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,036
<ALLOWANCES>                                       195
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                87,134
<PP&E>                                           5,960
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,078
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  91,234
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,929
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            28
<OTHER-SE>                                      79,149
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    91,234
<SALES>                                          5,250
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,706
<CGS>                                              147
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,450
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,249
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   8
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,845)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        25
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,870)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,870)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.21)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         922,237
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         399,354
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             2,900,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 41,609,760
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      13,878,099
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        13,728,909
<LOANS>                                    110,227,516
<ALLOWANCE>                                    507,202
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             175,706,224
<DEPOSITS>                                 131,909,574
<SHORT-TERM>                                 1,000,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            490,833
<LONG-TERM>                                 14,733,624
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  27,092,373
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             175,706,224
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              2,368,933
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              908,450
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                23,742
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             3,301,125
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           1,618,056
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,883,008
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,418,117
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   20,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              32,691
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              1,010,168
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                598,938
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     394,938
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   394,938
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.24
<LOANS-NON>                                    306,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                   276,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               487,202
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              507,202
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           507,202
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        194,824
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32   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 quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Flexpoint Sensor Systems, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), we, Clark M. Mower, Chief Executive Officer, and Thomas N. Strong, Chief Financial Officer of our Company, 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 result of operations of the Company.    Dated:  August 16, 2010 /s/ Clark M. Mower Clark M. Mower Chief Executive Officer   Dated: August 16, 2010 /s/ Thomas N. Strong Thomas N. Strong Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 21.01**

 

**LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF CONCUR TECHNOLOGIES, INC.**

 

1. Concur Technologies Pty. Limited, a corporation organized under the laws of Australia. 

 

2. Concur Technologies (UK) Ltd., a corporation organizedunder the laws of the United Kingdom. 

 

3.Captura Software, Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware. 

 

4. Captura Software International, Ltd., a corporation organized under the laws of the United Kingdom. 

 

5. Captura Asia Pacific Pty. Limited, a corporationorganized under the laws of Australia.
#### ALEXANDER MITCHELL and others v. DAVID N. KILBURN, Treasurer, &c.

It is error in the court below, to grant an appeal from the refusal of his Honor to g'rant a motion made by defendant, to dismiss the proceedings; an appeal thus improvidently granted will be dismissed in this court.

When a motion to dismiss the proceedings is overruled below, his Honor should proceed with the trial, leaving the parties to save their rights by exception; so that when final judgment is rendered, the appeal will present to this court, the questions raised upon the trial, as well as the motion to dismiss.

*i Ühitdx v. Martin.*(18 N. C. Rep. :10~; *Gray*v. *Gaither.*71 .fs. Kepi .11, cited and approved.)

This was a Special PiiooEKmMU, under the act of March :>d, 1875, heard before *Seymour. J.,*at Chambers, in Craven-eonnty, October 16th, 1875.

The proceeding was instituted upon the affidavit of the plaintiffs against the defendant, who is the treasurer of Craven county, on the ground that the surety on his official bond is insufficient. Upon the affidavit filed, the court ordered the defendant to appear at Chambers on the 9th day of October, 1875, and justify his said bond by evidence other than that of himself and his sureties.

The parties appeared on the return clay of said order, and the cuse was adjourned to the 16th of October, at which time all the parties being present, the defendant moved to vacate the order and to dismiss the proceeding, on the ground that the act of March 3d, 1875, under which the proceeding was instituted, was unconstitutional and void. The motion was overruled, and the defendant appealed.

*Green, Stevenson,*and *Lehman,*for the appellants.

IJnhbard, contra.

*484ByNüm, J.

The appeal was premature, and should not have been allowed, from a mere motion to dismiss the case. "When his Honor 'denied the motion to dismiss, he should have proceeded with the trial, leaving the parties to save their rights by exception, as well to the refusal to dismiss, as to the admission or rejection of evidence, which might have been offered in the progress of the trial, in support of the petition. So that when, the final judgment was rendered, the appeal would property present to this court the grave questions raised below, both as to the constitutionality of the act of 1874-75, chap-120, and the construction to be placed upon its provisions.

The appeal, having been improvidently granted, must be dismissed. C. C. P., sec. 299; *Child*v. *Martin,*68 N. C. Rep., 307; *Gray*v. *Gaither,*71 N. C. Rep., 51.

Pkk Curiam. Appeal dismissed.
---

EXHIBIT 8.1

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

|Subsidiary                                | Incorporating Jurisdiction
|----------------------------------------- | --------------------------
|                                          |                           
|Intravelnet Limited.                      | Ontario, Canada           
|InTRAVELnet Inc.                          | Alberta, Canada           
|ATM Travel Group Ltd.                     | Alberta, Canada           
|International Fitness Vacations (BC) Ltd. | British Columbia, Canada  
|Price Shield Systems Inc.                 | Washington, USA           
|American Life Settlement Society, LLC     | Deleware, USA             
|Colorado River Resorts, LLC               | California, USA           



---
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                               OPEN MARKET, INC.
                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                     (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
 
 
                                          THREE MONTHS ENDED    NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                            SEPTEMBER 30,         SEPTEMBER 30,
                                        --------------------   -------------------
 
                                          1996        1995       1996       1995
                                        --------   ---------   ---------   --------
 <S>                                   <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>
Net loss........................         $(5,870)     $(2,905)   $(19,396)   $(6,457)
                                        ========    =========   =========   ======== 
 
WEIGHTED AVERAGE NUMBER OF SHARES OUTSTANDING
 
Weighted average common shares         
 outstanding....................          28,186        9,263      18,379      9,267
                                        
Weighted average shares to             
 reflect common stock options          
 issued after March 31, 1995,          
 pursuant to the treasury stock        
 method.........................               -        3,619       1,896      3,619
  
Weighted average shares to
 reflect the conversion of
 Series A, B and C Preferred
 Stock..........................               -       13,437       7,038     13,437
                                         --------   ---------   ---------   --------
 
Pro forma weighted average
 number of common and common
 equivalent shares outstanding..          28,186       26,319      27,313     26,323 
                                         ========    =========   =========   ======== 
 
Pro forma net loss per common
 and common equivalent share....         $ (0.21)      $(0.11)     $(0.71)    $(0.25)
                                         ========    =========   =========   ======== 
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.1
        CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                 DISCLOSURE IN THE REGISTRANT'S ANNUAL REPORT



I, Gary C. Granoff, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Financial
Officer of Ameritrans Capital Corporation, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this  annual report on Form 10-k of Ameritrans Capital
Corporation (the "report");

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

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in the report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in the report;

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of the report
(evaluation date); and

(c) Presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation as of the evaluation
date.

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the board of directors (or
persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data; and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weakness in internal controls; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. I have indicated in the report whether or not there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent evaluation, including
any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
weakness. Dated: September 28, 2005




                       --------------------------------------
                       GARY C. GRANOFF
                       PRESIDENT, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                       CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER