alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

IN RE: DAVOL, INC./C.R. BARD, 

INC., POLYPROPYLENE HERNIA 

MESH PRODUCTS LIABILITY 

LITIGATION

This document relates to: 

ALL ACTIONS.

 Case No. 2:18-md-2846

 JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.

 Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson

ORDER 

On May 27, 2022, Defendants C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol Inc. filed a Motion for a Docket 

Control Order (ECF No. 627). The Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee shall file any response to the 

motion by Friday, June 10, 2022. Defendants shall file any reply by Friday, June 17, 2022.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

6/2/2022 s/Edmund A. Sargus, Jr.

DATE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case: 2:18-md-02846-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 628 Filed: 06/02/22 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 7845
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule has been  restated to reflect the Company's  adoption of Statement
of Financial  Accounting  Standards No. 128,  "Earnings Per Share" (FAS 128) and
contains summary financial  information  extracted from the consolidated balance
sheets,  consolidated  statements of income and consolidated  statements of cash
flows  included in the Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1997,
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such  financial  statements and
the notes thereto.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                              20,379
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        4,155
<ALLOWANCES>                                           168
<INVENTORY>                                          1,393
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    27,061
<PP&E>                                               5,298
<DEPRECIATION>                                       3,710
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      28,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                4,275
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 8
<OTHER-SE>                                          24,517
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        28,800
<SALES>                                             23,116
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    25,615
<CGS>                                                8,482
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       10,416
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     221
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      2,978
<INCOME-TAX>                                         1,081
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  4,059
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         4,059
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.53
        


</TABLE>
SCWC-12-0000645

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

HANNAH HARRISON,

Respondent/Petitioner/Appellant/Appellant,

vs.

GORDON I. ITO, INSURANCE COMMISSIONER,

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS,

STATE OF HAWAI#I,

Respondent/Respondent/Appellee-Appellee,

and

EVERCARE,

Petitioner/Respondent/Appellee-Appellee.

(SCWC-12-0000645; CAAP-12-0000645;

CIV. NO. 11-1-2903; HER-11-156920)

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

JENIVIE DELOS REYES, FRANKLIN BIDDINGER, FLOYD HAYES,

JOHN VILLANUEVA, and TEHINE AVILLA,

Respondents/Petitioners/Appellants-Cross-Appellees/Appellants,

vs.

GORDON I. ITO, INSURANCE COMMISSIONER,

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS,

STATE OF HAWAI#I,

Respondent/Respondent/Appellee-Appellee,

and

EVERCARE, 

Petitioner/Respondent/Appellee-Cross-Appellant/Appellee.

(SCWC-12-0000646; CAAP-12-0000646;

CIV. NO. 11-1-2553; HER-11-156817,

11-156241, 11-156361, 11-156251 & 11-155841)

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

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-12-0000645

24-NOV-2015

10:37 AM
AUDREY DELOS SANTOS, 

Respondent/Petitioner/Appellant/Appellant,

vs.

GORDON I. ITO, INSURANCE COMMISSIONER,

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS,

STATE OF HAWAI#I,

Respondent/Respondent/Appellee-Appellee,

and

EVERCARE,

Petitioner/Respondent/Appellee-Appellee.

(SCWC-12-0000647; CAAP-12-0000647;

CIV. NO. 11-1-2542; HER-10-154685)

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

ORDER ACCEPTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)

Petitioner’s Application for Writ of Certiorari filed

on October 15, 2015, is hereby accepted and will be scheduled for

oral argument. The parties will be notified by the appellate

clerk regarding scheduling.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, November 24, 2015.

Dianne Winter Brookins 

and Morgan Early for

petitioner

Rafael G. Del Castillo 

for respondents Hannah

Harrison, Jenivie Delos

Reyes, Franklin Biddinger,

Floyd Hayes, John Villanueva,

Tehine Avilla and Audrey

Delos Santos

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

MARK MAY, 

Plaintiff, Case No.: 3:18-cv-234

 

vs.

 

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman

(consent case)

Defendant.

ORDER: (1) APPROVING THE PARTIES’ JOINT STIPULATION FOR AN AWARD 

OF ATTORNEY’S FEES UNDER THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (“EAJA”)

(DOC. 18); AND (2) AWARDING PLAINTIFF $2,700.00 IN EAJA FEES

This Social Security disability benefits appeal is before the Court on the parties’ joint 

stipulation in which they agree that Plaintiff should be awarded attorney’s fees under the Equal 

Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, in the amount of $2,700.00. Doc. 18. Based 

upon the parties’ stipulation in which they present no dispute that all requirements are met for the 

reasonable award of EAJA fees, the Court: (1) APPROVES the parties’ joint stipulation (doc. 18); 

and (2) GRANTS Plaintiff EAJA fees in the amount of $2,700.00. As no further matters remain 

pending for review, this case remains TERMINATED upon the Court’s docket.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: February 19, 2019 s/ Michael J. Newman 

Michael J. Newman

United States Magistrate Judge
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Board of Trustees 

Universal Health Realty Income Trust: 

We consent to the incorporation byreference in the registration statements (Nos. 033-56843 and 333-57815) on Form S-8 and in the registration statements (Nos. 333-81763 and 333-60638) on Form S-3 of Universal Health Realty Income Trust of our reports dated March 14, 2007, withrespect to the consolidated balance sheets of Universal Health Realty Income Trust as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of income, shareholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in thethree-year period ended December 31, 2006, and the related financial statement schedule, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, and the effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, which reports appear in the December 31, 2006 annual report on Form 10-K of Universal Health Realty Income Trust. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

March 14, 2007
```

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65637-65638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22969]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9952-91-Region 1]

2016 Fall Joint Meeting of the Ozone Transport Commission and the 
Mid-Atlantic Northeast Visibility Union

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is 
announcing the joint 2016 Fall Meeting of the Ozone Transport 
Commission (OTC) and the Mid-Atlantic Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-
VU). The meeting agenda will include topics regarding reducing ground-
level ozone precursors and matters relative to regional haze and 
visibility improvement in Federal Class I areas in a multi-pollutant 
context.

DATES: The meeting will be held on November 17, 2016 starting at 9:15 
a.m. and ending at 4:00 p.m.
    Location: The Melrose Georgetown Hotel, 2430 Pennsylvania Avenue, 
Washington, DC 20037, 202-955-6400.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For documents and press inquiries contact: Ozone Transport 
Commission,

[[Page 65638]]

444 North Capitol Street NW., Suite 322, Washington, DC 20001; (202) 
508-3840; email: ozone@otcair.org; Web site: http://www.otcair.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 contain 
at Section 184 provisions for the Control of Interstate Ozone Air 
Pollution. Section 184(a) establishes an Ozone Transport Region (OTR) 
comprised of the States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, 
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode 
Island, Vermont, parts of Virginia and the District of Columbia. The 
purpose of the OTC is to deal with ground-level ozone formation, 
transport, and control within the OTR.
    The Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-VU) was formed in 
2001, in response to EPA's issuance of the Regional Haze rule. MANE-
VU's members include: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, 
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, 
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, the Penobscot Indian Nation, the 
St. Regis Mohawk Tribe along with EPA and Federal Land Managers.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Agenda: Copies of the final agenda will be available from the OTC 
office (202) 508-3840; by email: ozone@otcair.org or via the OTC Web 
site at http://www.otcair.org.

    Dated: September 13, 2016.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, Region I.
[FR Doc. 2016-22969 Filed 9-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, Case 3:18-CR-57 

-vs- Magistrate Judge Peter B. Silvian, Jr.

KATHLEEN GILL, 

Defendant. 

ORDER

The Government's Motion to Return Restitution Payment (Doc. #13) is GRANTED. Based 

on the restitution requirement in the above-captioned case being rescinded on March 22, 2023, the Clerk 

of Court is directed to return the $82.00 payment currently on deposit with the Court to the Defendant. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

______________________________ 

Peter B. Silvain, Jr. 

United States Magistrate Judge 

March 15, 2024 s/Peter B. Silvain, Jr.

Case: 3:18-cr-00057-PBS Doc #: 14 Filed: 03/15/24 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 17
#### Puroll v City of Madison Heights,

No. 91068;

reported below: 187 Mich App 672.
#### Jones et al. vs. Gatlin.

A party excepting to the finding of the court or jury, without a motion for new trial, must specify the error of law as to any ruling or decision of the court below. *Slate Bank vs. Conway,*13 *Ark.*344.

*35*Appeal from, the Gireidt Court of Oxiaehita County.*

Hon. Shelton "Watson, Circuit Judge.

Stith, for appellants.

Cunean & G-allaghee, contra.

Mr. Justice Scott

delivered the opinion of tbe Court.

This cause having originated in a proceeding before a justice of the peace, for a recovery upon a promissory note, was taken, by appeal, to the Circuit Court of Ouachita county, where both parties having appeared, and by consent, submitted the case to the court sitting as a jury, there was a general finding for the plaintiff, and judgment rendered accordingly. Whereupon, the defendants tendered a bill of exceptions, setting out, that the plaintiff read the note in evidence and closed his case, and that then the defendant, upon the plea of no-consideration, introduced certain testimony, which is detailed ; and that after hearing the same, and the argument of counsel, the court, to whom the cause had been submitted, (neither party requiring a jury) found for the plaintiff: *“to*which finding and judgment therein, the defendant excepted.” And then, in the language of the bill of exceptions, “because'none of the said matters of exception to the opinion and decision of the said court, do appear upon the record of the said trial, therefore, *&c.”*

So explicit is this record, that there can be no doubt but that this case is entirely within the rule settled by this court after a review of the previous decisions upon the point, in the case of *The State Bank vs.*Conway, 13 *Ark. R.*344; that where a party merely excepts to the finding of the court or jury, setting out the testimony, without any motion for a new trial, and without any exceptions, whereby he shall put his finger upon the alleged error *36of law as to any ruling or decision of the court below, there is no case presented for the consideration of this court on error or appeal.

This jndgmeut will, consequently, have to be affirmed, with costs.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

Kevin J. Shea,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 2:18-cv-555

Commissioner of

Social Security,

Defendant.

ORDER

This matter is before the court for consideration of the

February 19, 2019, report and recommendation of the United States

magistrate judge to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28

U.S.C. §636(b). The magistrate judge recommended that this case be

dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for want

of prosecution. The magistrate judge noted that plaintiff failed

to timely file a statement of errors by December 13, 2018, and

failed to respond to the court’s show cause orders of December 19,

2018, and February 11, 2019.

The report and recommendation specifically advised the parties

that failure to object to the report and recommendation within

fourteen days of the report would “result in a waiver of the right

to de novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal

the judgment of the District Court.” Doc. 18, p. 4. No objections

have been filed, and the time for filing such objections has

expired.

On March 7, 2019, plaintiff’s counsel filed a motion for leave

to withdraw, supported by an affidavit. Counsel stated that both

he and two experienced attorneys reviewed the administrative record
and concluded that there were no good grounds for an appeal. 

Counsel further stated that in November and December, he made

repeated attempts to contact plaintiff, both directly and through

the attorney who represented plaintiff at the administrative level,

but these efforts were unsuccessful. Counsel indicates that

because he is now employed by the Legal Aid Society of Columbus, he

cannot continue to provide services to plaintiff without first

determining whether plaintiff meets the qualifications for

representation. To date, plaintiff has failed to provide him with

the necessary information.

Having considered the record, including the information

provided by plaintiff’s counsel, the court adopts the report and

recommendation (Doc. 18) in part. The court agrees with the

recommendations of the magistrate judge, with the exception that

the court concludes that this case should be dismissed without

prejudice. The motion of counsel for leave to withdraw (Doc. 19)

is granted. This action is hereby dismissed without prejudice

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for want of prosecution.

Date: March 11, 2019 s/James L. Graham 

 James L. Graham

 United States District Judge 

2
UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION AT CINCINNATI 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , '- ~ I ! 

i .:- (' 

. ·-· 

Case No. 1:18-cr-00109(12) 

-vsSETH NEZAT 

ORDER APPOINTING 

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER/CJA PANEL ATTORNEY 

Because the above named Defendant has testified under oath or has otherwise satisfied this 

Court that he/she: (1) is unable to employ counsel; and (2) does not wish to waive counsel, and 

because in the interests of justice so require, it is 

ORDERED that CJA Panel Attorney Ravert J. Clark is appointed to represent the 

above named Defendant in this case. The Defendant may be required to contribute to the cost of 

this representation depending on circumstances to be determined at a later date. 

Stephanie K. Bowman 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case: 1:18-cr-00109-TSB Doc #: 89 Filed: 03/25/19 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 556
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 15



NationsBank of Texas, N.A. as Trustee
 for the Cross Timbers Royalty Trust:

We are aware that Cross Timbers Oil Company has incorporated by reference in its
Registration Statement No. 33-55784 on Form S-8 Cross Timbers Royalty Trust's
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1996, which includes our report
dated October 25, 1996, covering the unaudited interim financial information
contained therein.  Pursuant to Regulation C of the Securities Act of 1933, that
report is not considered a part of a registration statement prepared or
certified by our firm or a report prepared or certified by our firm within the
meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act.



ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Fort Worth, Texas
November 13, 1996
Signed by the Administrator - SO2 NAAQS

Joseph-J Dougherty to:

Lydia Wegman, Richard Wayland, 

Rosalina Rodriguez, Karen Martin, 

Jackie Ashley, Kathy Kaufman, Larry 

Wallace, Michael Stewart, Nealson 

Watkins, Rhonda Thompson, Tricia 

Crabtree, Valerie Broadwell, James 

Hemby, Jenny Noonan, Jan 

Cortelyou-Lee, Kelly Rimer, Brenda 

Millar

06/02/2010 08:45 PM

Cc: Mary Henigin, Alan Rush

History: This message has been replied to.

File below for web.
Exhibit 32.2



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 Da-Lite Screen Company, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending July 2, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, Jerry C. Young, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 results of operations of the Company.



/S/ Jerry C. YoungJerry C. YoungChief Financial OfficerAugust 16, 2004
PD-1427-13 F|LED|N COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS COURT OF CRIMINALAPPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS Transmitted 3/11/2015 7:22:07 PM March 12,2015 Accepted 3/12/2015 8:56:36 AM xt~ im 1/10-7 11 ABELACOSTA 

### ABELACOSTA, CLERK JNO. rJJ-14Z/-lj, CLERK 

# J^y INTHETEXAS COURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALS 

# 0\,r^ \6 VANESSACAMERON, ^\\<^ Petitioner,

v. STATE OF TEXAS, Respondent.

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPONSE TO STATE'S REPLY
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS: 

### NOW COMES, Petitioner, VANESSA CAMERON, by and through 

### undersigned counsel files this motion for leave to file a Reply to the State's Brief and in support ofsame would show the following: 1. OnFebruary 13,2015 this Honorable Courtnotified Counsel thatthe Court 

### would allow oral argument and further briefing on rehearing, for submission on March 18, 2015. 

### 2. The State filed its BriefFollowing the Granting ofRehearing on Petition 

### for Discretionary Review on February 20, 2015. 3. Undersigned counsel are filing their Reply Brief promptly to give this Honorable Courttime to sufficientlyreview this Briefpriorto submission. 

# ELECTRONIC RECORDWHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Petitioner, Vanessa 

### Cameron, respectfully prays that this Honorable Court grant this Motion for Leave 

### to File a Reply to State's Brief. Respectfully submitted:
GERALD H. GOLDSTEIN Bar No. 08101000 DONALD H. FLANARY Bar No. 24045877 GOLDSTEIN, GOLDSTEIN AND HILLEY 

### 310 S. St. Mary's St. 

### 29th Floor Tower LifeBldg. San Antonio, Texas 78205 210-226-1463 210-226-8367 facsimile
JOHN T. HUNTER Bar No. 24077532 310 S. St. Mary's St. 

### Suite 1840- Tower Life Bldg. San Antonio, Texas 78205 210-399-8669 210-568-4927 facsimile By: Is/ GeraldH. Goldstein Gerald H. Goldstein 

### Attorneys for Applicant, VANESSA CAMERONCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that on March 11, 2015, a true and correct copy ofthe above and foregoing document was served on Jay Brandon, Assistant District Attorney at the Bexar County District Attorney's Office, by electronic mail tojay.brandon@bexar.org.
By: /s/ GeraldH. Goldstein Gerald H. Goldstein
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND DECEMBER 31, 1999, AND
THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATION FOR THE THREE AND NINE MONTHS ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           3,298
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,687
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (332)
<INVENTORY>                                      1,801
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,535
<PP&E>                                           9,349
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (7,002)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  30,834
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,086
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           136
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,564
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    30,834
<SALES>                                         42,420
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                42,420
<CGS>                                           35,934
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   40,486
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   187
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 566
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,747
<INCOME-TAX>                                       588
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,159
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,159
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06


</TABLE>