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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Petroleum
Helicopters, Inc.'s condensed consolidated financial statements for the six
months ended June 30, 2000 and the six months ended June 30, 1999 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000             JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,139                       0
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,648                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     38,881                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                85,245                       0
<PP&E>                                         124,963                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 213,726                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           34,554                       0
<BONDS>                                         60,946                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           516                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                      91,625                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   213,726                       0
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               107,764                 111,886
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  102,019                 103,452
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,983                   2,857
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,758)                 (4,582)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,004)                 (1,891)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,754)                 (2,691)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,754)                 (2,691)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.34)                  (0.52)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.34)                  (0.52)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 6.1



EPS Calculation



The following schedule summarizes the information used to compute earnings per common share:



|                                                                                             |  |                          |  |             |  |            
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------ |  | ----------- |  | -----------
|                                                                                             |  | Years ended December 31,
|                                                                                             |  | 2003                     |  | 2002        |  | 2001       
|Weighted average number of common shares used to compute basic net income per common share   |  | 145,832,000              |  | 144,795,000 |  | 142,962,000
|Dilutive effect of stock options                                                             |  | 1,341,000                |  | 992,000     |  | 2,093,000  
|                                                                                             |  |                          |  |             |  |            
|Weighted average number of common shares used to compute diluted net income per common share |  | 147,173,000              |  | 145,787,000 |  | 145,055,000
|                                                                                             |  |                          |  |             |  |
#### Breen, Appellant, vs. Kennedy, Respondent.

*May 21*

June *17, 1914.*

*Appeal: Affirmance and reversal: Bill of exceptions: Discretionary orders.*

1. In the absence of a bill of exceptions, a judgment supported by the pleadings and findings will not be disturbed on appeal.

2. An order denying a motion to extend the time to settle a bill of exceptions, being within the sound discretion of the trial court, will not be disturbed on appeal unless that discretion was abused.

Appeal from a judgment and an order of the circuit court for Washburn county: Prank A. Ross, Circuit Judge.

*Affirmed.*

For the appellant the cause was submitted on the brief of *Bruce Fleming.*

*L. H. Mead,*for the respondent.

Keewin, J.

This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment and an order refusing to extend the time after it had expired to settle the bill of exceptions in the case. After the judgment was perfected notice of the entry thereof was served upon the plaintiff’s counsel May 10, 1912. Almost immediately after the entry of judgment counsel for plaintiff procured from the official reporter a copy of his minutes taken upon the trial, but took no steps to settle the bill of exceptions for about fifteen months thereafter, when he applied to the court for an order opening the default and extending the time to settle the bill of exceptions. This application was based upon affidavits of the plaintiff and his attorney and counter affidavits of the defendant and his attorney. The court, after hearing the motion, made an order denying it with $10 costs of motion.

The pleadings and findings support the judgment, therefore we cannot disturb the judgment in the absence of a bill *49of exceptions. On the appeal from the order denying the motion to extend the time to settle the hill of exceptions the matter was within the sonnd discretion of the court below, and unless that discretion was abused we cannot disturb the order. We think the court below was well warranted in denying the application, therefore the order must be affirmed. *Sly v. Kilbourn City,*144 Wis. 203, 128 N. W. 872.

*By the Gourt.*— The judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.
EXHIBIT 11

                           THE DEWOLFE COMPANIES, INC.
                 STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                     Years Ended December 31,
                                              1996             1995             1994
                                              ----             ----             ----
<S>                                         <C>              <C>              <C>
Weighted average shares outstanding         3,310,713        3,216,266        2,828,941

Net effect of dilutive stock
   options-based on the treasury stock
   method using the year end market price,
   if higher than average market price.        97,905          165,902          112,932
                                           ----------       ----------        ---------
Total                                       3,408,618        3,382,168        2,941,873
                                           ==========       ==========        =========
Net income                                 $1,930,000       $  115,000       $  534,000
                                           ==========       ==========       ==========
Net income per share                       $      .57       $      .03       $      .18
                                           ==========       ==========       ==========
</TABLE>
~Ja;.M~§B3 err ... ., ...... 'f .. ............ e 

USCIB: 13. 2/22 

9 July 1954 

00NPIBBN'fiAfi 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE MEMBERS OF USCIB: 

Subject: 

References: 

Clearance for Access to CCJ.1INT (LT Thomas T. Wetmore, 

III, USCG). 

(a) USCIB 12./3 dated l July 1954. 

(b) USCIB 13.7/15 dated 18 May 1954. 

1. The Department of the Treasury has designated LT Thomas T. 

Wetmore, III, U.S. Coast Guard, as its representative on the Ad Hoc 

Connnittee designated in reference (a). 

' 

2. Service on the above Committee includes a need to know Category 

III COM.INT information. 

3. The Department of the Navy has been requested to obtain the 

necessary clearance for LT Wetmore. 

4. As the matter of LT Wetmore's indoctrination is urgent, USCIB 

approval or LT Wetmore 1s indoctrination will be considered verified if 

no objection to this action is received by the office of the Executive 

Secretary, USCIB, by 1700, 15 July 1954. 

USCIB: ;J-3.2/22 

D.eclassified and approved for release by NSA on 02-27-2014 pursuant to E. 0. 1352B 

COA'f'IDEP\'TIAL 

24
Amend #1 to Agreement bet. Office Cherifien des Phosphates and Miss. Phosphates




 Exhibit 10.2 
 AMENDMENT NO 1 TO THE AGREEMENT 
 DATED AS OF JANUARY 1, 2005 
 BETWEEN 
 OFFICE CHERIFIEN DES
PHOSPHATES, 
 (OCP) 
 AND 
 MISSISSIPPI PHOSPATES CORPORATION 
 (MPC) 








 AMENDMENT NO 1 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN 
 OCP AND MPC DATED AS OF JANUARY 1ST, 2005 
 AMENDMENT NO 1 OF AGREEMENT 
 This Amendment No 1 of Agreement (“Amendment No 1”) is effective as of January 1, 2006, between: 
 OFFICE CHERIFIEN DES PHOSPHATES (OCP) 
 2, Rue Al Abtal Hay Erraha 
 CASABLANCA – (Morocco), 
 on the one part, 
 and, 
 MISSISSIPPI PHOSPHATES CORPORATION (MPC) 
 P.O. Box 848 Pascagoula, 
 Mississippi 39568-0848 
 USA, 
 on the other part. 
 W I T N E S S E T H 
 WHEREAS, OCP and MPC are parties to that certain Agreement with an effective date of
January 1st, 2005, for the sale and purchase of all of MPC’s requirements of phosphate rock at its Pascagoula Plant
(“Agreement”). 
 WHEREAS, OCP and MPC agree to extend the duration of such Agreement. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, OCP and MPC hereby agree as follows: 
 1. Article I, Section 1.1, of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: 
 “This Agreement shall be effective as of January 1st, 2005, and shall continue for a term of Four (4) years ending on December 31st, 2008. 
 The duration of this Agreement shall thereafter automatically stand extended for successive periods of Four (4) years
unless either of the parties hereto gives written notice of termination 6 (six) months at least before the beginning of the considered period to the other party.” 
 2. Except as specifically set forth in this Amendment No 1, all of the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 
 3. All capitalized terms used in this Amendment No 1 and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement.









 AMENDMENT NO 1 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN 
 OCP AND MPC DATED AS OF JANUARY 1ST, 2005 
 Page 2 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, OCP and MPC have caused this Amendment No 1 to be duly executed as of the first day of January 2006. 
  

									
	MISSISSIPPI PHOSPHATES CORPORATION	 		 	OFFICE CHERIFIEN DES PHOSPHATES
					
	 By:
	 	Robert E. JONES	 		 	By:	 	Mourad CHERIF
			
	 /s/    Robert E. Jones
	 		 	 /s/    Mourad Cherif

	Chief Executive Officer	 		 	Director General
NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

14675 Lee Road

Chantilly, VA 20151-1715

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Release #07-12

Contact: (703) 808-5050 June 29, 2012

NRO SATELLITE SUCCESSFULLY LAUNCHED ABOARD DELTA IV

ROCKET

A National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) payload was successfully launched 

aboard a United Launch Alliance DELTA IV rocket from Space Launch Complex37, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), Florida, at 9:15 a.m. EST, on 

June 29, 2012.

This is the third of four scheduled launches in five months for the NRO this year, 

two at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., and two at CCAFS. The next NRO 

launch is scheduled for August 2, 2012, at Vandenberg. 

“Our government and industry teams have done it again with this morning’s 

perfect launch. All their hard work has contributed to providing superior vigilance 

from above for the Nation,” remarked Col James D. Fisher, Director of Office of 

Space Launch. 

The NRO is a joint Department of Defense-Intelligence Community organization 

responsible for developing, launching, and operating America’s signals, imagery, 

and communications satellites to meet the needs of our nation. 

-NRO-
CERTIFICATIONS  I, R. Halsey Wise, certify that:1.
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Intergraph
      Corporation;2.
    Based on my knowledge, this 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
      this report;3.
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial
      information included in this 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 this
  report;4.
    The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
      establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
      defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
      and have:a)
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
      disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
      to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
      its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us 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 and presented in this report our conclusions about the
      effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
      the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc)
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
      control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
      most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the
      case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably
      likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over
      financial reporting; and5.
    The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
      based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
      reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
      registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
      functions):a)
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
      operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
      reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
      process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
      employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
      over financial reporting.Date:  November 13, 2003/s/
      R. Halsey WiseR.
      Halsey WiseChief
      Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
            SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as
Co-Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Optimal Robotics Corp. (the
"Company"), does hereby certify that to the best of the undersigned's knowledge:

      1)    the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
            31, 2003 (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 results of operations
            of the Company.


Dated: March 5, 2004                            /s/ Neil S. Wechsler
                                                ----------------------------
                                                    Neil S. Wechsler
                                                    Co-Chairman and
                                                    Chief Executive Officer
OCT 1 195:

SULJECT: Security Consideration Regarding WS un an Relation
to Rano-Wooldridgs Corporation toe.

TO: ; Ramo-Wooldridges Corporation

le ARDC Syaten +t Directive No. 1171, ¥, ,
hee er 5 1s ae Oe nbd ‘Advanced ~
ment, progrosts rentinad on Anfornation relating to'tee etter
mont et et Me dred status, and planned operational capabilities

DOWNGRADED AT 12 YEAR - :
INTERVALS, NO} AUTOMATICALLY
DECLASSIFIED. DOD DIR 5200.10: I tad |
FI

tee
ea



oo t |

oe an = . = . ~ , ms .,
“CONFIDENT MO :

‘ WD (CR ARDC) Subject: Security Consideration Regarding WS 1071
in ee to RanomWocldridge Corporation

with WS 1271,
; SIGNED

2 Incl; . CHARIES H, TERHUNE, JR .

6 Copies of Colonel, usar . :

Master Security Guide‘ Comm der

Deputy
ce: WTO .
WDSIs .
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1202/2006

of 9 August 2006         

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 10 August 2006.

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

Done at Brussels, 9 August 2006.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 386/2005 (OJ L 62, 9.3.2005, p. 3).

----

ANNEX

to Commission Regulation of 9 August 2006 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

----

(1)  Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 750/2005 (OJ L 126, 19.5.2005, p. 12). Code ‘            999            ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1998
<CASH>                                          70,098
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,078
<ALLOWANCES>                                       133
<INVENTORY>                                      2,345
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                76,396
<PP&E>                                           3,246
<DEPRECIATION>                                     513
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  79,341
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,613
<BONDS>                                            132
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           221
<OTHER-SE>                                      73,375
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    79,341
<SALES>                                         28,133
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                28,594
<CGS>                                           25,874
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,928
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  32
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,712)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        64
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,776)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.13)
        

</TABLE>
# CE2004084EN.01012701.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/127 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/127

---

(2004/C 84 E/0163)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3986/03

by Sebastiano Musumeci (UEN) to the Commission

(6 January 2004)

Subject:   Radioactive waste dumps in Sicily

Subject:

It is feared that radioactive waste dumps are being located in the mines of Pasquasia (Enna) and Realmonte (Agrigento) in Sicily.

It seems that ENEA considered these sites to be suitable and that they are on a specific list drawn up by the European Union.

As well as being subject to earthquakes, the areas concerned have development potential for agriculture and tourism and are therefore totally unsuitable for accommodating highly toxic waste.

Can the Commission say:

| 1. | what preliminary scientific research was carried out in order to choose the storage sites; |
| --- | --- |

1.

what preliminary scientific research was carried out in order to choose the storage sites;

| 2. | whether it does not consider in any event that the island of Sicily which by its very nature should be exploited for quite different purposes, is an unsuitable location for storing radioactive waste, in view of the fact that it has already paid a very high price in environmental terms as the location of the largest petrochemical plant in Europe? |
| --- | --- |

2.

whether it does not consider in any event that the island of Sicily which by its very nature should be exploited for quite different purposes, is an unsuitable location for storing radioactive waste, in view of the fact that it has already paid a very high price in environmental terms as the location of the largest petrochemical plant in Europe?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(10 February 2004)

(10 February 2004)

The Commission would recall to mind that each Member State is responsible for the management of all spent fuel and radioactive waste under its jurisdiction.

Concerning the identification of a radioactive waste repository in Italy, the Commission notes that the Italian Government has entrusted a commission of experts with the task of identifying and assessing potential sites.

The Commission has not been involved in drawing up a specific list of sites for the disposal of radioactive waste in Italy. Therefore, the Commission cannot say what scientific research was carried out in relation to the sites mentioned by the Honourable Member.

The Commission would also like to refer the Honourable Member to the replies it gave to written questions P-3519/03 by Mr Turco (1) and P-3657/03 by Mr Procacci (2).

1

2

---

(1)  OJ C 78 E, 27.3.2004, p. 570.

1

(2)  OJ C 78 E, 27.3.2004, p. 846.

2

---