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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         138,443
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,566
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         279,747
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 561,721
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        371,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            29
<OTHER-SE>                                      98,622
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   561,721
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,302
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,809
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    162
<INCOME-TAX>                                        48
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                114
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       114
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 10.2


ACNielsen

CONSENT

We hereby consent to the use of information from our monthly reports "Audit
Report Beer and Soft Drink", covering the period January 1993 to December 2001,
on Form 20-F of Quilmes Industrial (QUINSA Societe Anonyme). We further consent
to the use of our name in such Form 20-F, and to the filing of this consent as
an exhibit thereto and to the incorporation of this consent into any
registration statement that Quinsa may file.



/s/ A.C. Nielsen S.A. de C.V. Sucursal Argentina
Adrian Sarrica
Apoderado
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arlene MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-10324

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*971Submitted May 8, 2017 *

Filed May 11, 2017

Robert Lally Miskell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USTU — Office of the US Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Thomas Scott Hartzell, Attorney, T.S. Hartzell, Attorney at Law, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant

Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Arlene Martinez appeals from the district court’s order denying her motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Martinez contends that the district court abused its discretion by denying her motion for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. The district court properly interpreted and applied U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 in considering Martinez’s motion and did not abuse its discretion by denying Martinez a sentence reduction based on her criminal history, her role in the offense, and her post-offense conduct. *See*U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 cmt. n.l(B); *United States v. Dunn,*728 F.3d 1151, 1155 (9th Cir. 2013). Contrary to Martinez’s contention, the district court adequately explained its determination that a reduction was unwarranted. *See United States v. Trujillo,*713 F.3d 1003, 1010 (9th Cir. 2013).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit 32.2


          CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 8 U.S.C.
               SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
                         THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

                                    CERTIFICATION

In connection with Quarterly Report of Euro Group of Companies, Inc. (formerly
ICT Technologies, Inc.), a Delaware corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A
for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Chief Financial
Officer, hereby certifies, pursuant to 8 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) 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/  Andrew Eracleous
                                            -----------------------------------
                                                 Andrew Eracleous
                                                 Chief Financial Officer


January 9, 2008
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Kodigbo Odelugo v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 12

- 00272

- CR

Trial court case number: 1249648

Trial court: 248th District Court of Harris County

On May 2, 2014, th e Court issued its mandate in the above

- referenced appeal . A ppellant

has filed a motion to “Recall and Stay the Court’s Mandate” because he “intends to file a Writ of

Habeas Corpus as permitted by the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.” Appellant’s motion is

denied

. 1

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Terry Jennings

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: May 16, 2014

1 See Ex parte Webb , 270 S.W.3d 108, 111 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (concluding that court

of appeals was not required to recall its mandate and considering merits of application for

ha beas relief).
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6753

JOHNNY WHITE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

G. L. WOODARD,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CA-97-590-5-HC-H-3)

Submitted: August 27, 1998 Decided: September 17, 1998

Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Johnny White, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe Delforge, III, NORTH

CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court's

opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district

court. White v. Woodard, No. CA-97-590-5-HC-H-3 (E.D.N.C. Apr. 28,

1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 December 21, 2018

a1217

Order 

Clerk

December 21, 2018

157318

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 157318

COA: 335316

Kent CC: 06-012242-FC

GIOVANNI KOESE-ERIC CASPER,

Defendant-Appellant.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 11, 2018 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### Richard P. KUSCHELL, Betty M. Kuschell, Edward M. Rader, Lila Rader, Martin W. Kramer and Lillian G. Kramer, Plaintiffs, v. HOTEL PLAYA DE LUQUILLO CORP., Joseph B. Danzansky, and Bernard Libby, Defendants.

Civ. *No.*41-61.

United States District Court D. Puerto Rico, San Juan Division.

March 12, 1962.

*205F. J. Perez Almiroty, F. Ponsa Feliu, San Juan, P. R., for plaintiffs.

Gutierrez & Ramirez, San Juan, P. R., for defendants.

RUIZ-NAZARIO, Chief Judge.

This action is now before the Court ■on defendants’ motion to dismiss the second cause of action or alternatively to strike such language of the amended complaint dealing with punitive damages.

The matter had already been raised and passed by the Court at the time that plaintiffs requested, and obtained from the Court, leave to file said amended complaint.

I have given the matter further consideration in view of the memoranda filed by the parties, but I see no meritorious grounds for changing my original ruling.

Though it is true that there is very little authority in support of plaintiffs’ claim that punitive damages may be awarded under the laws of Puerto Rico, there is no doubt that such type ■of damages are awardable in the District <of Columbia. See: Wardman-Justice Motors Inc. et al. v. Petrie, 59 App.D.C. 262, 39 F.2d 512, 69 A.L.R. 648.

As the tortious conduct on which the second cause of action of the complaint is based, took place mostly, if not entirely, within the District of Columbia, plaintiffs are entitled to invoke the laws of the District of Columbia as the source of their right to relief on the second cause of action.

Defendants’ said motion must therefore be denied.

It is so ordered.
INNOVATIVE MEDICAL SERVICES                                           EXHIBIT 11
COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED APRIL 30, 1998 AND 1999





                                               For the Nine Months Ended
                                                        April 30
                                             -------------------------------
                                             1999                  1998
                                             -------------------------------
Shares outstanding                           4,392,242             3,832,851
                                             =========             =========

Weighted average shares outstanding          4,056,349              3,713,071
Stock Options                                1,415,000                406,250
Warrants                                     1,798,125              1,798,125
                                             ---------              ---------
  Total weighted average shares outstanding  7,269,474              5,917,446
                                             =========              =========

Net Income (Loss)                         $    490,459           $ (1,885,981)
                                          ============           =============

Primary Net Earnings (Loss) per share     $       0.12           $      (0.51)
                                          ============           =============
Fully Diluted Net
    Earnings (Loss) per share             $       0.07           $      (0.32)
                                          ============           =============

                                       10
<PAGE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

BARRY F. MILLER and 

MARIA J. MILLER,

 Appellants,

v.

SUNNY VIEW, LLC, VIEW POINT

ACREAGE, LLC, BELLA VISTA

CUSTOM HOMES, INC., ANDRES E.

TELLES D/B/A ATCON ENGINEERING

& SURVEYING, and LANDAMERICA

LAWYERS TITLE OF EL PASO,

 Appellees. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

 §

 §

 §

No. 08-10-00045-CV

Appeal from

 120th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC # 2007-2515)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pending before the Court is the joint motion of Appellants, Barry F. Miller and Maria J.

Miller, and Appellees, Sunny View, LLC, View Point Acreage, LLC, Bella Vista Custom Homes,

Inc., and Andres E. Telles d/b/a Atcon Engineering & Surveying, to dismiss a portion of the appeal

pursuant to TEX.R.APP.P. 42.1 because the parties have reached a partial settlement. These parties

have agreed to dismiss the appeal concerning all claims by and between them. The Millers intend

to continue their appeal of an order granting summary judgment in favor of LandAmerica Lawyers

Title of El Paso. We grant the motion and dismiss the portion of the appeal concerning the settling

parties. Pursuant to the parties’ agreement, we assess costs against the party incurring same. See

TEX.R.APP.P. 42.1(d)(absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant). 

Due to the partial dismissal, it is necessary to restyle the appeal. The appeal will proceed in

the same cause number as Barry F. Miller and Maria J. Miller v. LandAmerica Lawyers Title of
El Paso. 

July 30, 2010 

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Justice

Before Chew, C.J., McClure, and Rivera, JJ.

Rivera, J., not participating
##### 



1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of SentiSearch, Inc.;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 small business issuer as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;4.
    
    I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer
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 small business issuer, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report my 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; and(c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal
control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small
business issuer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 small business issuers ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal
control over financial reporting.
  /s/ Joseph K. Pagano

Joseph K. PaganoChief Executive Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 11672]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby                               ( print page 13039)                            determine that certain objects being imported from abroad pursuant to agreements with their foreign owners or custodians for temporary storage and display in the exhibition “Cartier and Islamic Art: In Search of Modernity” at the Dallas Museum of Art, Dallas, Texas, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary storage and exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned are in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Chi D. Tran, Program Administrator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:                         *section2459@state.gov*). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street, NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), E.O. 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                     *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                     *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 2021.                

Stacy E. White,

                        Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs,                         *Department of State.*

[FR Doc. 2022-04863 Filed 3-7-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 51 (Wednesday, March 16, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 14899]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05563]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Mental Health; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National 
Institute of Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel, March 24, 2022, 9:00 
a.m. to March 24, 2022, 5:00 p.m., National Institutes of Health, 
Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD, 20852, 
which was published in the Federal Register on February 28, 2022, FR 
DOC 2022-04158, 87 FR 11080.
    This notice is being amended to change the date from March 24, 
2022, to April 5, 2022. Meeting time and location remain the same. The 
meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: March 11, 2022.
Melanie J. Pantoja,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-05563 Filed 3-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 29, 2016

No. 04

- 14

- 00886

- CV

CITY OF SAN ANTONIO

, Appellant

v.

HAYS STREET BRIDGE RESTORATION GROUP

,

Appellee

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012

- CI

- 19589

Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Appellee ’ s motion for leave to amend and supplement brief is hereby GRANTED.

It is so ORDERED on September 29 , 2016.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:

______________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
1 

### Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 12:24 PM

To: 'lehto@kennon.com'

Cc: '333exemptions@faa.gov' Subject: Petition for Exemption: Motown Digital, LLC (Docket No. FAA-2015-0529)



### May 28, 2015

Dear Mr. Lehto:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2015-0529). This information is necessary for the Fe deral Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

 Describe the aircraft make, mode l, and type (i.e. - fixed-wing, ro torcraft, lighter-than-air) for the proposed UAS operation. The description shoul d include the maximum weight (including payload). This information can be located in the aircraft manual.

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, S ection 1. If you wish for us to proceed without this manual and remove closed-set filming from your proposed operat ion please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Hea dquarters or electronically via e-mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov . If you want us to process your request a ny further, we must receive the information described above by June 11, 2015. If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

Nia Daniels Program Analyst

Nia Daniels, ARM

‐ 108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075 nia.daniels@faa.gov