alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 12.1

Statement of Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

Company

PredecessorYear Ended December 31,

Eleven Months
Ended
December 31,(3)
2007

One Month
Ended
January 31,
2007Year Ended
December 31,
20062010

2009

2008(in 000's, except ratio amounts)Pre-tax income (loss) from continuing operations

$
(64,150
)
$
(88,973
)
$
(39,466
)
$
(102,002
)
$
(62,518
)
$
49,310Income from equity investees


(757
)

(386
)

(1,383
)

(887
)




Fixed charges


105,447


95,384


93,507


80,929


5,819


55,842Amortization of capitalized interest














7


24Capitalized interest

















(515
)Total earnings

$
40,540

$
6,025

$
52,658

$
(21,960
)
$
(56,692
)
$
105,691Interest expense(1)

$
24,497

$
14,474

$
12,999

$
15,420

$
5,345

$
49,637Estimated interest within rent expense(2)


80,950


80,910


80,508


65,509


474


5,690Capitalized interest

















515Total fixed charges

$
105,447

$
95,384

$
93,507

$
80,929

$
5,819

$
55,842Ratio of earnings to fixed charges


N/A


N/A


N/A


N/A


N/A


1.89Deficiency of earnings available to cover fixed charges

$
(64,907
)
$
(89,359
)
$
(40,849
)
$
(102,889
)
$
(62,511
)
$



(1)Includes
interest expense and amortization of premiums, discounts and capitalized expenses related to indebtedness.(2)Estimated
interest within rent expense includes one-third of rental expense, which approximates the interest component of
operating leases.(3)Includes
the operating results of Petro Stopping Centers, L.P., which has since been merged with TA Operating LLC, since our
acquisition of Petro Stopping Centers, L.P., which was completed on May 30, 2007.


---



QuickLinks
#### Terrell Bartel Anthony MILLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kyle PRATT, ATF Agent; Agent Szentimaria; United States District Attorney for the Middle District of North Carolina, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-6045

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 30, 2017

Decided: April 4, 2017

Terrell Bartel Anthony Miller, Appellant Pro Se.

Before TRAXLER and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Terrell Bartel Anthony Miller appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2012). We havé reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Miller v. Pratt, No. 1:15-cv-00491-NCT-JLW, 2016 WL 7351591 (M.D.N.C. Dec. 19, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,

Petitioner 

v.

KEITH HALL BARKLEY,

 Respondent 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 2411 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 144 DB 2016

Attorney Registration No. 70521

(Philadelphia)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 14th day of November, 2017, upon consideration of the Report 

and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board, Keith Hall Barkley is suspended from 

the Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of two years, and he shall comply with all the 

provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217. Respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board 

pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).
#### William Alexander LARA-ELIAS, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 17-1191

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: October 24, 2017

Decided: November 3, 2017

Ronald D. Richey, LAW OFFICE OF RONALD D. RICHEY, Rockville,' Maryland, for Petitioner. Chad A. Readier, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Derek C. Julius, Assistant Director, Jason Wisecup, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William Alexander Lara-Elias, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of his applications for asylum, with*274holding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the transcript of Lara-Elias’ merits hearing before the immigration court and all supporting evidence. We conclude that we are without jurisdiction to review the agency’s finding that Lara-Elias’ asylum application is time-barred. *See Mulyani v. Holder,*771 F.3d 190, 196-97 (4th Cir. 2014) (noting that express language of 8 U.S.C. §' 1158(a)(3) (2012) prevents review of IJ’s finding that applicant did not establish changed or extraordinary circumstances). Accordingly, we dismiss in part the petition for review. Concerning the Board’s denial of withholding of removal and protection under the CAT, we conclude that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the administrative factual findings, *see*8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. *See INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).

Accordingly, we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid. the decisional process.

*PETITION DISMISSED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART*
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





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act
of 2002, I, Todd Noble, Chief Financial Officer of Advanced
ID Corporation (the “Company"), hereby certify, that to the best of
my knowledge, the Quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the
quarterly period ended March 31, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.





Date: May
9, 2005





/s/Todd D. NobleTodd
      D. Noble, Chief Financial Officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 2, 2019

No. 04-19-00327-CV

PLAINSCAPITAL BANK and Albert Chapa,

Appellants

v.

Andy HERNANDEZ,

Appellee

From the 229th Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas

Trial Court No. DC-17-712

The Honorable Baldemar Garza, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is hereby GRANTED. The 

appellant’s brief is due on or before August 1, 2019.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 2nd day of July, 2019.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle,

Clerk of Court
# EUR-Lex - 32002L0001 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32002L0001

**Commission Directive 2002/1/EC of 7 January 2002 amending Directive 94/39/EC as regards animal feedingstuffs for the support of liver function in case of chronic liver insufficiency (Text with EEA relevance) **

*
Official Journal L 005 , 09/01/2002 P. 0008 - 0009 *

Commission Directive 2002/1/EC

of 7 January 2002

amending Directive 94/39/EC as regards animal feedingstuffs for the support of liver function in case of chronic liver insufficiency

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 93/74/EEC of 13 September 1993 on feedingstuffs intended for particular nutritional purposes(1), as last amended by Directive 1999/29/EC(2), and in particular Article 6(c) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) By Directive 94/39/EC(3), as amended by Directive 95/9/EC(4), the Commission has adopted a list of intended uses of animal feedingstuffs for particular nutritional purposes.

(2) Further scientific research has demonstrated that there is no necessity to lower or moderate the level of fat in feedingstuffs intended to support liver function in chronic liver insufficiency for cats and dogs. It has however shown that it would be beneficial to indicate on the label the need for water to be available to animals fed with such feeds at all times.

(3) Directive 94/39/EC should therefore be adapted accordingly.

(4) The measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Feedingstuffs,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

Article 1

The Annex to Directive 94/39/EC is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Directive.

Article 2

Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 20 November 2002 at the latest. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.

When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.

Article 3

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

Article 4

This Directive is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 7 January 2002.

For the Commission

David Byrne

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 237, 22.9.1993, p. 23.

(2) OJ L 115, 4.5.1999, p. 32.

(3) OJ L 207, 10.8.1994, p. 20.

(4) OJ L 91, 22.4.1995, p. 35.

ANNEX

In part B of the Annex to Directive 94/39/EC, the text of the particular nutritional purpose "Support of liver function in case of chronic liver insufficiency" concerning dogs and cats is replaced by the following: >TABLE>
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5870 

To direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to establish a grant program to facilitate land acquisitions made to improve 

water quality, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 14, 2016 

Mr. MURPHY of Florida (for himself and Mr. CLAWSON of Florida) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation 

and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 

Agency to establish a grant program to facilitate land 

acquisitions made to improve water quality, and for other 

purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Partnership 

5 for Clean Water Land Acquisition Act of 2016’’. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5870 IH

1 SEC. 2. CLEAN WATER LAND ACQUISITION GRANT PRO2 GRAM. 

3 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Not later than 60 days after 

4 the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of 

5 the Environmental Protection Agency shall establish a 

6 program to facilitate land acquisitions made for the pur7 pose of improving water quality. 

8 (b) GRANT AUTHORITY.—In carrying out the pro9 gram established under subsection (a), the Administrator 

10 may make a grant, in accordance with this section, to any 

11 State. 

12 (c) APPLICATIONS.—To be eligible for a grant under 

13 subsection (b), a State shall submit to the Administrator 

14 an application at such time, in such form, and containing 

15 such information as the Administrator may require. 

16 (d) GRANT USE.—A State may use grant amounts 

17 provided under subsection (b) only— 

18 (1) to acquire private land; and 

19 (2) if the acquisition of the land will substan20 tially improve, as determined by the Administrator, 

21 water quality for an area (including by means of 

22 water storage, water treatment, estuary restoration, 

23 or ecosystem restoration). 

24 (e) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the 

25 costs of any land acquisition assisted with a grant under 

26 subsection (b) shall not exceed 50 percent. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5870 IH

1 (f) STATE DEFINED.—In this section, the term 

2 ‘‘State’’ means any governmental entity of the several 

3 States, the District of Columbia, or a territory or posses4 sion of the United States. 

5 (g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is 

6 authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator for 

7 each fiscal year $750,000,000 to carry out this section. 

Æ 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 13.1

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 Annual Report of Gazit-Globe Ltd. (the Company) on Form 20-F/A (Amendment No.1) for the period ended December 31, 2013
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Aharon Soffer, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: September 23, 2014



|                 
|-----------------
|/s/ Aharon Soffer
|Aharon Soffer    
|President
#### Anthony MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee

2016-2092

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Decided: May 4, 2017

Anthony Moore, Federal Correctional Institution, Marianna, FL, pro se.

P. Davis Oliver, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washing-ton, DC, for defendant-appellee. Also represented by Benjamin C. Mizer, Robert E. Kirschman, Jr., Reginald T. Blades, Jr.

Before Moore, Taranto, and Chen, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam.

Anthony Moore appeals an order from the United States Court of Federal Claims (“Claims Court”) dismissing his complaint for lack of jurisdiction. Because the Claims Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the complaint, we *affirm.*

Background

Mr. Moore is an inmate at a federal prison in Florida. He alleges the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) was deliberately indifferent to his medical needs by refusing to treat his dizzy spells, ear and nose pain, migraine head-aches, broken finger, and injured toe. He seeks damages of $500,000. The Claims Court sua sponte dismissed Mr. Moore’s complaint, holding it lacked jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1491 because his allegations sounded in tort. Mr. Moore appeals. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(3).

Discussion

The Claims Court is a court of limited jurisdiction and lacks jurisdiction to hear claims sounding in tort. 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a)(1). Allegations that the BOP failed to provide appropriate medical care are claims sounding in tort over which the Claims Court lacks jurisdiction. *Trafny v. United States,*503 F.3d 1339, 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Mr. Moore contends his claim may be maintained under the Supreme *992Court’s decision in *Estelle v. Gamble,*429 U.S. 97, 97 S.Ct. 285, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976). *Estelle*holds that deliberate indifference to prisoners’ serious medical needs may violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. *Id.*at 104-05, 97 S.Ct. 285. The Claims Court lacks jurisdiction to hear claims arising under -the Eighth Amendment. *Trafny,*503 F.3d at 1340. Therefore, the Claims Court lacks jurisdiction to hear Mr. Moore’s complaint.

Conclusion

The order from the Claims Court is *affirmed.*

AFFIRMED

Costs

No costs. .
# EUR-Lex - 32002R0351 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32002R0351

**Commission Regulation (EC) No 351/2002 of 25 February 2002 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 3605/93 as regards references to ESA 95 **

*
Official Journal L 055 , 26/02/2002 P. 0023 - 0023 *

Commission Regulation (EC) No 351/2002

of 25 February 2002

amending Council Regulation (EC) No 3605/93 as regards references to ESA 95

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3605/93 of 22 November 1993 on the application of the Protocol on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community(1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 475/2000(2), and in particular Article 7 thereof,

Whereas:

(1) The definitions of "government", "deficit" and "investment" are laid down in the Protocol on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaty and in Regulation (EC) No 3605/93, by reference to the European system of national and regional accounts in the Community (hereinafter referred to as "ESA 95") established by Council Regulation (EC) No 2223/96 of 25 June 1996 on the European system of national and regional accounts in the Community(3), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 113/2002(4).

(2) Regulation (EC) No 2223/96 contains the reference framework of common standards, definitions, classifications and accounting rules for drawing up the accounts of the Member States for the statistical requirements of the European Community, in order to obtain comparable results between Member States.

(3) Regulation (EC) No 2558/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 December 2001 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2223/96 as regards the reclassification of settlements under swaps arrangements and under forward rate agreements(5) has changed the classification of interest flows under swap contracts and forward rate agreements (FRAs) from income property to financial account while stating at the same time the need for a specific treatment of these flows for the data transmitted under the excessive deficit procedure.

(4) Regulation (EC) No 3605/93, should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5) In order to avoid confusion concerning the application of the new references to ESA 95, the measures provided for in this Regulation should apply with effect from 1 January 2002,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Article 1(3) of Regulation (EC) No 3605/93 is amended as follows:

1. the code "B.9" is replaced by "EDP B.9";

2. the code "D.41" is replaced by "EDP D.41".

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall apply from 1 January 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 25 February 2002.

For the Commission

Pedro Solbes Mira

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 332, 31.12.1993, p. 7.

(2) OJ L 58, 3.3.2000, p. 1.

(3) OJ L 310, 30.11.1996, p. 1.

(4) OJ L 21, 24.1.2002, p. 3.

(5) OJ L 344, 28.12.2001, p. 1.
#### Billy Junior ARTIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Captain WILLIAMS; Lieutenant Kelly; Sergeant Jackson; Officer Waffer; Ms. Washington; Administrator Daniels; Assistant Superintendent Cobb; Watson Goodman, III; Ms. Dawson; Captain May, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-6023

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 30, 2017

Decided: April 4, 2017

Billy Junior Artis, Appellant Pro Se. Yvonne Bulluck Ricci, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Ap-pellees.

Before TRAXLER and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Billy Junior Artis appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. *293§ 1983 (2012) action without prejudice for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. *See*4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Artis’ informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Artis has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. *See Williams v. Giant Food Inc.,*370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

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 Annual Report of Golden Century
Technologies Corporation (the "Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June
30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Owen L.J. Jones the Principal Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

(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/ Hong YangHong YangPresident, Secretary and
Treasurer Director (Principal Executive Officer)

September 28, 2008Dated:

---