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

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          16,377
<SECURITIES>                                     2,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,599
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     12,965
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                38,206
<PP&E>                                          92,156
<DEPRECIATION>                                  15,727
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 150,312
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,293
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           829
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   150,312
<SALES>                                          8,396
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,396
<CGS>                                            7,083
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,446
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 240
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,290)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (440)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (850)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (850)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.10)
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C.  20549

 

Form10-Q

 

(MarkOne)

[X]   Quarterly Report PURSUANT TO Section 13 or15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934

 

For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2008

 

 

[]   Transition Report PURSUANTTO Section 13 or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934

 

 

For the transition period from _________to _________

 

Commission file number 0-10435

 

 

CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVI

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

 

 

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to befiled by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during thepreceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was requiredto file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements forthe past 90 days.  

[X]Yes  [ ] No

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, anaccelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reportingcompany.  See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “acceleratedfiler” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

 

Indicateby check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule12b-2 of the Exchange Act). [ ] Yes  [X] No
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.2

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

   We hereby consent to the use in this registration statement on Form S-1 of
our report dated October 20, 1999, except for the information contained in the
second paragraph of Note 8 for which the date is November 22, 1999, relating to
the financial statements of SmarterKids.com, Inc., which appears in such
registration statement. We also consent to the reference to us under the
heading "Experts" in such registration statement.

PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

November 22, 1999
03/22/201 0 15:2 0 FAX 202493514 2 FA A* DM S @|001/00 2

UNrrE D STATE S DEPARTMEN T O FTl^ANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC E O FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D.C . I N TH E MATTE ROF : " ^ § FA A Docke t No . CP09 S W000 7 § AMERICA N FAGL E AIRLINES, INC . § FA A Cas e 2007SW21037 7 jin d § 2007SW21039 3 § U . S . Administrativ e Law Judg e § RichardC . Goodwi n § NOTIC E O FDEPOSITTO N O K MAR K ZIN C Pursuan t t o 1 4 C.F.R . §13.220(j) , pleas e tak e notic e that th e undersigne dcounse l wil l tak e th e depositio n upo n oral examinatio n o f Mar k Zinc , beginnin g a

t 2p mo n Marc h 10 , 2010 , a t American Airlines , Inc. , 433 3 Amo n Carte r Boulevard , For

t Wortli , Texa s 76155 , befor e a certifie dcour

t reporte r authorize dt o administe r

oaths , lo r

al l purpose s permitte db y federal rule s an dstatutes . Respectfull y submitted ,

Franci s C . Ilei l American Airlines , Inc . Legal Departmen t P.O . Bo x 61961 6 MD 567 5 DFW Airport , TX 75261-961 6 Attorne y fo

r America n Eagl e Airlines , Inc . Dated- . Febniar y 26 , 201 0 :]AI:O N

:• • i03/22/201 0 15:2 0 FA X 202493514 2 FA A* DM S 11002/00 2

CERTIFICAT E O FSERVIC E I hereb y certif

y that o n Februar y 26 , 2010 , acop y o f

th e foregoin g Notic e o f

Depositio n ha s bee n serve db y Federal Expres s Priority Overnigh t delivery o n th e following : Mar k Zin c 203 6 Laz y Lan e Roanoke , TX 7626 2 817-222-506 8 Hearin g Docke t

Clerk , AGC-43 0 (U.S . Mai l only ) Federa l Aviatio n Adminisn-atro n Offic e o f th e Chie f Counse l Wilbur Wright Building , Suite 2W100 0 60 0 Independenc e Avenue , SW. , Washington , D C 2059 1 Ren aM . Price , Attorne y Federal Aviatio n Administratio n Southwes t Regio n Offic e o f th e Regional Counsel , ASW- 7 260 1 MeachamBlvd . For t Worih , Texa s 7613 7 rena.m.priccra:!faa.go v T : 817-222-506 8 F : 817-222-594 5



## 1^1

- Lis aA . Paparelli , Fara l
#### Office of Disciplinary Counsel *v.*Gosling.

[Cite as *Disciplinary Counsel v. Gosling*(1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 1213.]

(No. 97-438

Submitted and decided August 11, 1999.)

For earlier case, see *Disciplinary Counsel v. Gosling*(1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 113, 679 N.E.2d 1096.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

SP PLUS CORPORATION,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

IPT, LLC, DBA PAYLOCK,

Defendant-Appellant

______________________ 

2017-1539

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of Louisiana in No. 2:16-cv-02474-MLCFJCW, Judge Martin L.C. Feldman.

______________________ 

O R D E R

______________________ 

Before PROST, Chief Judge, NEWMAN and STOLL,

Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM. 

 IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

In light of the affirmance in Appeal No. 2017-2151, 

this case is dismissed as moot.
2 SP PLUS CORPORATION v. IPT, LLC

 FOR THE COURT

 December 19, 2017 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner 

 Date Peter R. Marksteiner

 Clerk of Court
Spot Prices

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_spt_s1_a.htm 07:58:35 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration Series Linkhttp://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=RBRTE&f=A Series KeyRBRTE.A Year Europe Brent Spot Price FOB $/bbl 2012 111.63 2011111.26 2010 79.61 2009 61.74 2008 96.94 2007 72.44 2006 65.16 2005 54.57 2004 38.26 2003 28.85 2002 24.99 2001 24.46 2000 28.66 1999 17.9 1998 12.76 1997 19.11 1996 20.64 1995 17.02 1994 15.86 1993 17.01 1992 19.32 1991 20.04 1990 23.76 1989 18.23 1988 14.91 1987 18.53
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                   AS ADDED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Intermagnetics General Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending February 27, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Michael K. Burke, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as addeD by ss. 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.


/s/ Michael K. Burke*
-------------------------
Michael K. Burke
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
April 7, 2005


* These certifications are being furnished as required by Rule 13a-14(b) under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, and shall not be deemed
"filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to
the liability of that Section. These certifications shall not be deemed to be
incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or
the Exchange Act, except as otherwise stated in such filing.
ate

si
is)

sins

08-06-2044 pursuant to EO.
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1328/2006

of 8 September 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 9 September 2006.

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

Done at Brussels, 8 September 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 8 September 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>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
<CURRENCY>                                       U.S.$
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           3,925
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   50,097
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,712
<INVENTORY>                                     15,428
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                71,232
<PP&E>                                         256,105
<DEPRECIATION>                                 142,402
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 253,780
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           33,873
<BONDS>                                        137,366
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,322
<COMMON>                                        20,068
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,106
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   253,780
<SALES>                                         13,979
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                75,000
<CGS>                                           11,270
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   62,303
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,235
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,650
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,888
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,762
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,762
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18
        




</TABLE>
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

729 

CA 13-02144 

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ. 

 

STEVEN M. PHILLIPS, AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF 

BRIAN J. PHILLIPS, DECEASED, AND AS SUCCESSOR 

ADMINISTRATOR C.T.A. OF THE ESTATE OF WILLIAM G. 

PHILLIPS, DECEASED, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

 

V ORDER

BROCK, SCHECHTER & POLAKOFF, LLP, LAWRENCE 

LEVIN, C.P.A., AND FRANK A. KACZMARCZYK, C.P.A.,

DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

------------------------------------------------

BROCK, SCHECHTER & POLAKOFF, LLP, LAWRENCE 

LEVIN, C.P.A. AND FRANK A. KACZMARCZYK, C.P.A.,

THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS,

V

LAW OFFICES OF EUGENE C. TENNEY, THIRD-PARTY

DEFENDANT. 

GOLDBERG SEGALLA LLP, BUFFALO (BRIAN R. BIGGIE OF COUNSEL), FOR

DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS.

GELBER & O’CONNELL, LLC, AMHERST (HERSCHEL GELBER OF COUNSEL), FOR

PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

HISCOCK & BARCLAY, BUFFALO (DAVID M. HEHR OF COUNSEL), FOR THIRD-PARTY

DEFENDANT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Tracey A.

Bannister, J.), entered September 13, 2013. The order denied the

motion of defendants-third-party plaintiffs to compel the further

deposition of an employee of third-party defendant. 

Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation withdrawing appeal

signed by the attorneys for the parties on May 20, 29 and June 10,

2015, 

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed 

without costs upon stipulation.

Entered: November 13, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.2

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

   We hereby consent to the use in the Prospectus constituting part of this
Registration Statement on Form S-1 of our report dated March 22, 1999, except
for the last paragraph of Note 7 which is as of August 10, 1999, relating to
the financial statements of eMed Technologies Corporation, which appears in
such Prospectus. We also consent to the application of such report to the
Financial Statement Schedule for the three years ended December 31, 1998 listed
under Item 16(b) of this Registration Statement when such schedule is read in
conjunction with the financial statements referred to in our report. The audits
referred to in such report also included this schedule. We also consent to the
reference to us under the headings "Experts" in such Prospectus.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Boston, Massachusetts

September 10, 1999
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-50461

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

REYNALDO CONDE-COVARRUBIAS,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. A-01-CR-242-ALL-SS

--------------------

October 30, 2002

Before DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Reynaldo Conde-Covarrubias appeals the sentence imposed

following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United

States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He

contends that the sentence is invalid because it exceeds the

two-year maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(a). Conde-Covarrubias complains that his sentence was

improperly enhanced pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) based on

his prior deportation following an aggravated felony conviction. 

He argues that the sentencing provision is unconstitutional. 
No. 02-50461

-2-

Alternatively, Conde-Covarrubias contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a)

and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) define separate offenses. He argues

that the aggravated felony conviction that resulted in his

increased sentence was an element of the offense under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(2) that should have been alleged in his indictment. 

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Conde-Covarrubias acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed

by Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1202 (2001). This court

must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court

itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of

the district court is AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-10437

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE ROBERTO LOPEZ

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:07-CR-65-ALL

Before DAVIS, STEWART, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jose Roberto Lopez presents

arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. Gomez-Herrera,

523 F.3d 554, 557-64 (5th Cir.), petition for cert. filed (July 2, 2008) (No. 08-5226)

which held that any disparity in sentencing between fast-track and non-fasttrack jurisdictions is a function of Congressional policy and is not“unwarranted”

under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6), and by United States v. Rodriguez, 523 F.3d 519,

526-27 (5th Cir.), petition for cert. filed (June 30, 2008) (No. 08-5101) which held

that the lack of a fast-track program does not result in a violation of equal

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

November 5, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-10437

protection rights. See also United States v. Lopez-Velasquez, 526 F.3d 804, 808

(5th Cir.), petition for cert. filed (July 25, 2008) (No. 08-5514). The appellant’s

motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district

court is AFFIRMED.
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-15-00031-CR

CHARLES FRANCIS WILLIAMS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 354th District Court

Hunt County, Texas

Trial Court No. 30,068

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ.
2

O R D E R

Our review of the court reporter’s record and clerk’s record in this case indicates that both 

such records contain “sensitive data” as that phrase is defined in Rule 9.10 of the Texas Rules of 

Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.10(a). Sensitive data includes “a driver’s license 

number, passport number, social security number, tax identification number or similar 

government-issued personal identification number,” as well as “a birth date, a home address, and 

the name of any person who was a minor at the time the offense was committed.” TEX. R. APP. P. 

9.10(a)(1), (3). The clerk’s record includes government-issued personal identification numbers, 

and volume eight of the reporter’s record includes the names of persons who were minors at the 

time the offense was committed. Rule 9.10(b) states, “Unless a court orders otherwise, an 

electronic or paper filing with the court, including the contents of any appendices, must not contain 

sensitive data.” TEX. R. APP. P. 9.10(b).

Rule 9.10(f) provides, “A court may also order that a document be filed under seal in paper 

form or electronic form, without redaction.” TEX. R. APP. P. 9.10(f). Therefore, because the 

appellate record contains sensitive data, we order the clerk of this Court or her appointee, in 

accordance with Rule 9.10(f), to seal volume eight of the electronically filed reporter’s record and 

the entirety of the electronically filed clerk’s record in this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: November 5, 2015
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          13,126
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,229
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (314)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,544
<PP&E>                                          10,482
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (8,913)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  26,957
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,888
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            66
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,003
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    26,957
<SALES>                                          9,741
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,741
<CGS>                                            2,180
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,180
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,418
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    260
<INCOME-TAX>                                        37
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                223
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       223
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04


</TABLE>