alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
##### 



Exhibit 12 Advanced Lighting Technologies, Inc.
Statement Re: Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges(In thousands) PredecessorReorganized Company
    
    
    
    CompanyThree Months
    
    
    Nine Months
    
    
    Three Months
    
    
    
    Six MonthsEnded
    
    
    Ended
    
    
    Ended
    
    
    
    EndedMarch 31,
    
    
    March 31,
    
    
    March 31,
    
    
    
    December 31,2005
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    
    2003Income (loss) before income taxes
and minority interest
    
    $
    898
    
    
    $
    4,532
    
    
    $
    (911
    )
    
    
    $
    (13,235
    )Interest expense
    
    
    3,453
    
    
    
    10,345
    
    
    
    3,410
    
    
    
    
    7,459Interest portion of rent expense
    
    
    167
    
    
    
    491
    
    
    
    124
    
    
    
    
    329Earnings
    
    $
    4,518
    
    
    $
    15,368
    
    
    $
    2,623
    
    
    
    $
    (5,447
    )Interest expense
    
    $
    3,453
    
    
    $
    10,345
    
    
    $
    3,410
    
    
    
    $
    7,459Interest capitalized
    
    
    6
    
    
    
    19
    
    
    
    42
    
    
    
    
    37Interest portion of rent expense
    
    
    167
    
    
    
    491
    
    
    
    124
    
    
    
    
    329Fixed charges
    
    $
    3,626
    
    
    $
    10,855
    
    
    $
    3,576
    
    
    
    $
    7,825Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    1.2
    
    
    
    1.4
    
    
    
    0.7
    
    
    
    
    
 For purposes of calculating the unaudited ratio of earnings to fixed charges, earnings consist
of income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest plus fixed charges. Fixed charges
consist of interest charges and amortization of debt issuance costs, whether expensed or
capitalized, the portion of rental expense that is representative of interest, and preferred share
accretion. For the three months ended March 31, 2004, earnings were inadequate to cover fixed
charge requirements by $953. For the six months ended December 31, 2003, earnings were inadequate
to cover fixed charge requirements by $13,272.
Exhibit 8.1

List of Principal Subsidiaries



|                                     |  |                           
|------------------------------------ |  | --------------------------
|Name                                 |  | Place of Incorporation    
|ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES INC.            |  | Republic of China         
|                                     | 
|ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES (H.K.) Limited  |  | Hong Kong                 
|                                     | 
|MODERN MIND TECHNOLOGY LIMITED       |  | British Virgin Islands    
|                                     | 
|ChipMOS TECHNOLOGIES (Shanghai) LTD. |  | Peoples Republic of China
|                                     | 
|ThaiLin Semiconductor Corp.          |  | Republic of China
Argued and submitted July 16,

affirmed December 10, 1979

#### MATTSON, *Respondent, v.*ROSEBURG LUMBER COMPANY, *Petitioner.*

(WCB Case No. 77-7918, CA 13610)

603 P2d 1192

Eileen Tuhy Cole, Medford, argued the cause for titioner. With her on the brief was Collins, Velure & eysell, Medford.

Michael Strooband, Eugene, filed the brief for spondent.

Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Richardson and (berts, Judges.

SCHWAB, C. J.

*499SCHWAB, C. J.

Claimant suffers from bilateral hip disease of long tanding. He claims that his condition became worse s a result of his employment. Employer denied the Laim. The referee ordered the claim accepted. The !oard affirmed. So do we.

Employer relies upon *Weller v. Union Carbide,*35 Or App 355, 582 P2d 8 (1978), aff’d 288 Or 27, 602 P2d 259 (1979), for its position. It may well be that if mployer had produced any medical evidence refuting íat of claimant, the ultimate result might have been hat the employer argues for. The employer did not, nd thus the uncontroverted medical evidence is that aimant’s underlying condition was made somewhat orse by his employment.1

Affirmed.

1

 Orthopedic consultants to whom claimant was referred by his treats' physician stated:

> "In our opinion, this man’s condition at the present time is stationary as far as the occupational picture is concerned. We feel that this man should not return to the same occupation because he does have a considerable degree of bilateral hip disease secondary to his old slipped capital epiphyses. The greater problems of this man’s hip problems are not related to his industrial injury. He did apparently aggravate his right hip secondary to the work he performed and we believe that this hip has not completely resolved itself to the former condition, even though he has had a considerable rest.”
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
unaudited financial statements of Berthel Fisher & Company Leasing, Inc. as of
June 30, 1999, and the six months ended June 30, 1999, and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         368,049
<SECURITIES>                                 1,641,795
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,550,837
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (282,518)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       1,458,290
<DEPRECIATION>                               (850,417)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,886,036
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          561,950
<BONDS>                                      6,308,088
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,621,422
<COMMON>                                       884,705
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,490,129)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,886,036
<SALES>                                        788,503
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               788,503
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               670,294
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               109,730
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             290,320
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (281,841)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (106,270)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (175,571)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (175,571)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.54)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.54)


</TABLE>
No. 91-6387.

#### Larette *v.*Delo, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center.

Sup. Ct. Mo. Certiorari denied.
No. 91-6265.

#### Allgood *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNews Releases2000

# NRC Inspection Team to Present Findings of its Review of Possible Radiation Overexposures at Mallinckrodt Facility

----

----

**NRC INSPECTION TEAM TO PRESENT FINDINGS OF ITS REVIEW OF POSSIBLERADIATION OVEREXPOSURES AT MALLINCKRODT FACILITY**

A Nuclear Regulatory Commission special inspection team will meet Friday, June 23, with Mallinckrodt, Inc., officials in Maryland Heights, Missouri, to discuss the results of the team's review of possible radiation overexposures at the company's plant there. The meeting will be open to public observation.

The meeting will be at 9:30 a.m. in the Maryland Heights Community Center, Room 3, 2344 McKelvey Road.

Mallinckrodt produces radioactive drugs that are used in research and in routine medical diagnosis and therapy. The company's processing and distribution of radioactive materials is regulated by the NRC and, for certain materials produced in a particle accelerator, by the State of Missouri.

The review by the NRC Augmented Inspection Team began in early May after the company reported a possible radiation overexposure to a worker's hand on April 13 and subsequently identified other work areas at its plant where workers might have received radiation exposures to their hands above NRC limits.

The team included four NRC inspectors and a State of Missouri inspector.

The Augmented Inspection Team will issue a written report in several weeks. A future NRC inspection will review the team's findings to determine if any enforcement action is appropriate.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
Human Factors Information System (HFIS)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

From 01/01/2008 to 12/31/2008Page 166 of 22605/29/2009 10:01:12

2x N

Total 

N

Document Types: IR, LER IR/LER Category Analysis by Docket Report

N

Average for Se

Details Department Work Type 

Facility Name: Robinson 2 Docket (050- 00261)

Communication / IR160 - No communication / information not communicated M - Mechanical O - Control Room Ops 

160 - No communication / information not communicated O - Operations O - Control Room Ops 

211

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Human-System Interface & Environmnt / IR170 - HSI or information availability / quality LTA M - Mechanical T - Testing 

16

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Procedures & Reference Document / IR111 - Procedure / reference document technical content M - Mechanical T - Testing 

16

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Problem Identification & Resolution / IR140 - Problem not completely or accurately identified M - Mechanical T - Testing 

141 - Problem not properly classified or prioritized O - Operations O - Control Room Ops 145 - Causal development LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 146 - Evaluation LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 146 - Evaluation LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 146 - Evaluation LTA O - Operations O - Control Room Ops 147 - Individual corrective action LTA M - Mechanical T - Testing 149 - No action planned M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 

844

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Work Planning & Practices / IR183 - Pre-job activities LTA O - Operations O - Control Room Ops 

186 - Failure to take action / meet requirements M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 186 - Failure to take action / meet requirements M - Mechanical T - Testing 194 - Housekeeping LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 

422

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 
Human Factors Information System (HFIS)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

From 01/01/2008 to 12/31/2008Page 167 of 22605/29/2009 10:01:12

2x N

Total 

N

Document Types: IR, LER IR/LER Category Analysis by Docket Report

N

Average for Se

Details Department Work Type 

Facility Name: Robinson 2 Docket (050- 00261)

Procedures & Reference Document / LER111 - Procedure / reference document technical content D - Emergency Planning D - Emergency Drill 

16

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Work Planning & Practices / LER187 - Action implementation LTA H - Health Physics H - Health Physics 

16

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Total Items for this Docket: 18
On respondents John and Thelma Neal’s petition for attorney fees filed January 13,

and on respondent Richard Boudreau’s petition for attorney fees filed January 20,

petitions denied June 30, 1993

#### John NEAL and Thelma Neal, *Counterdefendants - Respondents, v.*DART CUSTOM CUTTERS, INC., an Oregon corporation, Wade D. Neal and Richard Boudreau, *Cross-Defendants - Respondents, and*James TOWERY, *Cross-Claimant and Counterclaimant - Appellant,*James TOWERY, *Third Party Plaintiff, v.*BENTON ELECTRIC, INC., a Delaware corporation, *Third Party Defendant.*

(891329; CA A68612)

855 P2d 200

*438Clayton C. Patrick, Salem, *contra.*

Before Riggs, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Durham, Judges.

DURHAM, J.

*439DURHAM, J.

Respondents Boudreau and John and Thelma Neal prevailed on appeal in this case, *Neal v. Dart Custom Cutters, Inc.,*117 Or App 543, 843 P2d 1025 (1992), and petition for attorney fees on appeal under ORS 87.336. Appellant objects, and we deny each petition.

Appellant contends that Boudreau’s petition was not properly served. ORAP 13.10(2) provides:

> “A petition for attorney fees shall be served and filed within 21 days after the date of decision.”

A party seeking fees must serve the petition by “delivering it on the other parties to the cause.” ORAP 1.35(2)(a). Service on a party’s attorney is service on the party. *O’Connell, Goyak & Ball v. Silbernagel,*297 Or 207, 210, 681 P2d 1159 (1984).

Appellant contends that Boudreau failed to serve the petition on appellant’s counsel on appeal. He served it on attorney Jones, and contends that, at that time, Jones represented appellant “at the trial court level in the pending contempt proceedings * *

The appellate record does not include the record of a contempt proceeding. We cannot confirm Boudreau’s representation that appellant is represented by Jones, and we will not retrieve the record of a contempt proceeding that is not before us in order to search for the identity of appellant’s counsel. ORAP 5.45(3).

Boudreau eventually served appellant’s appellate counsel, but that service was untimely. ORAP 13.10(2). Accordingly, we deny Boudreau’s petition.

In seeking attorney fees, the Neals rely on ORS 87.336, which provides:

> “In suits to foreclose the liens created by ORS 87.216 to 87.232, the court shall, upon entering judgment for the lien claimant, allow as part of the lien, the moneys paid for the filing or recording of the lien as provided in ORS 87.910. The court shall also allow reasonable attorney fees at trial and on appeal to the prevailing party.”

*440That statute does not authorize an award of attorney fees in this proceeding. Appellant’s unsuccessful counterclaim was based on ORS 87.162, which concerns a landlord’s possessory chattel lien. Neither ORS 87.336 nor any other statute authorizes an attorney fee award for litigation over a landlord’s lien. Although appellant did not object on that ground, we raise the issue on our own motion, ORAP 13.10(6)(b), and deny the Neals’ petition.

Petitions denied.
#### Will of Phillips: Children’s Home & Aid Society of Wisconsin and others, Appellants, vs. Thompson and another, Respondents.

For the appellants: *Lecher, Michael, Whyte '& Spohn*of Milwaukee, *Masters & Hansen*of Sparta, and *George J. Larkin*of Dodgeville.

For the respondents: *Gibbon & Hamilton*of Dodgeville.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

YAACOV BENAROSH AND BATYA BENAROSH,

Petitioners

v.

MICHAEL AXELROD AND JOAN AXELROD, INDIVIDUALLY, HIS HEIRS AND ASSIGNS, AND AS TRUSTEES OF

THE MICHAEL AXELROD 2012 IRREVOCABLE TRUST, TRIAD REALTY,

MARLENE ZARRETT AND BARE FEET SHOES,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 48 EM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 15th day of July , 2019

, the Petition for Leave to File Petition for

Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is DENIED.
No: 19-027 June 20, 2019

CONTACT: David McIntyre, 301-415-8200

NRC Approves License Transfer for Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved the transfer of the Oyster Creek Nuclear 

Generating Station license from Exelon Generation Co. to Oyster Creek Environmental Protection, 

as owner, and Holtec Decommissioning International, as decommissioning operator.

The three companies requested the license transfer in August 2018. Once the purchase is 

finalized, as previously announced, OCEP and HDI plan to expedite decommissioning and 

dismantling of the plant. The license transfer includes the dry cask spent fuel storage installation at 

Oyster Creek. The NRC order approving the license transfer is effective immediately, but the 

license transfer will not be finalized until the successful completion of the transaction between 

Exelon, OCEP and HDI. At that point, the NRC will issue a license amendment reflecting 

completion of the transfer.

Oyster Creek is a boiling water reactor located in Lacey Township, N.J. It permanently 

ceased operations in September 2018.

In reviewing the license transfer application, the NRC staff considered OCEP’s and HDI’s 

technical and financial qualifications, the adequacy of Oyster Creek’s decommissioning trust funds 

to complete the radiological decommissioning of the plant, and the adequacy of plans to manage the 

onsite storage of spent nuclear fuel until it can be removed for storage or disposal elsewhere. The 

staff concluded that OCEP and HDI met the regulatory, legal, technical and financial requirements 

necessary to qualify as licensees. The Commission on June 18 denied two requests for an 

adjudicatory hearing challenging the license transfer.

The NRC order approving the transfer was issued June 20. The order and other documents

related to the review will be available through the NRC’s ADAMS online documents database at 

accession number ML19095A454.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsBrochures Prepared by NRC Staff

# United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Construction Inspection Program (NUREG/BR-0355)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Introduction

Download complete document
        - NUREG/BR-0355 (PDF - 152.12 KB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** July 2008

Office of New Reactors U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

## Introduction

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is an independent Federal agency responsible for regulating non-military uses of nuclear technology. The NRC was created by the Energy Reorganization Act, signed into law in 1974.

*The NRC does not operate or construct nuclear plants. It regulates the safe operation and construction of test, research, and commercial nuclear plants.*

The NRC's Construction Inspection Program will be utilized during the construction of the next generation of U.S. nuclear reactors. The NRC began developing the Construction Inspection Program several years ago, identifying lessons learned from previous construction inspections during the 1980s, and updating the program for current nuclear power plant construction. The program is an important part of the NRC's licensing and oversight mission.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, March 24, 2021
No: II-19-028 May 7, 2019

Contact: Roger Hannah, 404-997-4417

 Joey Ledford, 404-997-4416

NRC Schedules Open House to Discuss

Safety Performance of NFS Erwin Facility

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has scheduled an open house for May 16 to discuss 

the oversight and inspection of the Nuclear Fuel Services facility in Erwin, Tenn., highlighted by the 

results of an NRC regulatory safety performance review.

The open house is scheduled to run from 6-7:30 p.m. in the Erwin Town Hall, 211 North Main 

Avenue in Erwin. NRC employees responsible for the inspection of NFS will be available at the open 

house to answer questions or provide additional information. Posters covering the agency’s inspections 

and the review of the facility’s operations will be available. 

The open house format is designed to allow more interaction with the NRC staff and better 

facilitate one-on-one and small group discussions. It also gives more time flexibility for nearby 

residents and others who may wish to attend. 

The NRC assessed performance at the NFS facility for the period beginning Jan. 1, 2017, and 

ending Dec. 31, 2018, in the categories of safety operations, radiological controls, facility support, and 

other areas. The NRC also assesses security, which will not be discussed during the open house due to 

the sensitive nature of the information.

The staff review determined that NFS continued to operate the facility safely and met NRC 

requirements for the protection of workers, nearby residents and the environment. Because the NRC 

review found that none of the program areas at NFS needed improvement, the agency will continue the 

normal inspection program for NRC-licensed nuclear fuel facilities of this type.

The NRC letter discussing the licensee performance review for the NFS facility is available on 

the NRC website.
No. 90-6307.

#### Clark *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# L_2014309EN.01002901.xml

| 30.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 309/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 309/29

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1156/2014

of 29 October 2014

correcting the Slovenian version of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1135/2009 imposing special conditions governing the import of certain products originating in or consigned from China, and repealing Commission Decision 2008/798/EC

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (1), and in particular Article 53(1)(b) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | The Slovenian language version of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1135/2009 (2) contains one repetitive error, i.e. the term ‘feed and food business operators’ is erroneous. Therefore a correction of the Slovenian language version is necessary. The other language versions are not affected. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The Slovenian language version of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1135/2009 (2) contains one repetitive error, i.e. the term ‘feed and food business operators’ is erroneous. Therefore a correction of the Slovenian language version is necessary. The other language versions are not affected.

| (2) | Regulation (EC) No 1135/2009 should therefore be corrected accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Regulation (EC) No 1135/2009 should therefore be corrected accordingly.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Concerns only the Slovenian language version.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 29 October 2014.

For the Commission

The President

José Manuel BARROSO

---

(1)  
  OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.

1

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1135/2009 of 25 November 2009 imposing special conditions governing the import of certain products originating in or consigned from China, and repealing Commission Decision 2008/798/EC (OJ L 311, 26.11.2009, p. 3).

2

---