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

<ARTICLE>                      5
<LEGEND>
The Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the financial
statements for Liberty Tax Credit Plus L.P. and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                          0000818020
<NAME>  Liberty Tax Credit Plus L.P.
<MULTIPLIER>                   1
       
<S>                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              MAR-15-1999
<PERIOD-START>                 MAR-16-1998
<PERIOD-END>                   DEC-15-1998
<CASH>                         15,407,956
<SECURITIES>                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                  605,546
<ALLOWANCES>                   0
<INVENTORY>                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>               1,385,992
<PP&E>                         256,925,070
<DEPRECIATION>                 87,550,635
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 190,214,425
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          29,361,690
<BONDS>                        159,382,220
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>          0
<PREFERRED>                    0
<COMMON>                       0
<OTHER-SE>                     1,470,515
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   190,214,425
<SALES>                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               26,519,341
<CGS>                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>               22,631,973
<LOSS-PROVISION>               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>             10,119,738
<INCOME-PRETAX>                (6,232,370)
<INCOME-TAX>                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            0
<DISCONTINUED>                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                0
<CHANGES>                      0
<NET-INCOME>                   (6,232,370)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                  (370.95)
<EPS-DILUTED>                  0

        

</TABLE>
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 4986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1787]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 7309]

Culturally Significant Object Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Gentile Bellini: Portrait of Caterina Cornaro, Queen 
of Cyprus''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 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, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236-3 of August 28, 2000, I hereby determine that the object to be 
included in the exhibition ``Gentile Bellini: Portrait of Caterina 
Cornaro, Queen of Cyprus,'' imported from abroad for temporary 
exhibition within the United States, is of cultural significance. The 
object is imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner 
or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the 
exhibit object at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, 
from on or about August 2, 2011, until on or about August 7, 2011, and 
at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is 
in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these 
Determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
description of the exhibit object, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-
Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State 
(telephone: 202-632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of 
State, SA-5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: January 20, 2011.
Ann Stock,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2011-1787 Filed 1-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.23
March 7, 1997


Mr. John C. Batterton
52 Parkside Lane
Rochester, New York 14612

Subject: Termination Agreement

Dear John:

As the President and CEO of CalComp Technology, Inc. the Board of Directors
extends to you the following termination agreement in the event you are
involuntary terminated from the company:

     .    This agreement will be for a period of 36 months beginning with your
          first day of employment.

     .    If you are involuntarily terminated any time during this 36 month
          period, you will be eligible for a lump-sum severance payment equal to
          you annualized base salary at the time of your termination of
          employment, in no case less than $250,000.

     .    You will also be eligible for a lump-sum cash payment, if applicable,
          for any vacation earned but not taken through your last day of
          employment.

     .    These termination agreement benefits will be forfeited if you should
          voluntarily resign or are terminated for cause.

     .    When these benefits become payable, standard exit and release
          documents must also be executed. These documents are required whenever
          severance is offered in excess of the normal severance policy.
 
If there are any questions I can answer regarding these benefits, please feel
free to contact me at any time.

Sincerely,

/s/ TERRY F. POWELL
Terry F. Powell
Chairman, Compensation Committee
CalComp Technology, Inc.
Board of Directors.

ACCEPTED:

/s/ JOHN C. BATTERTON  3/11/97
------------------------------
John C. Batterton
<Page>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 12a

                     PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY
               COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                    For the Years Ended December 31,
                                                 --------------------------------------
                                                  2004    2003    2002    2001    2000
                                                 -----   -----   -----   -----   ------
                                                        (Millions, except ratios)
<S>                                              <C>     <C>     <C>     <C>     <C>
Earnings as Defined in Regulation S-K (A):

Pre-tax Income from Continuing Operations        $ 592   $ 376   $ 320   $ 324   $  994
Fixed Charges                                      362     390     408     461      447
                                                 -----   -----   -----   -----   ------
Total Earnings                                   $ 954   $ 766   $ 728   $ 785   $1,441
                                                 =====   =====   =====   =====   ======

Fixed Charges as Defined in Regulation S-K (B)

Interest Expense                                 $ 362   $ 390   $ 406   $ 458   $  444
Interest Factor in Rentals                          --      --       2       3        3
                                                 -----   -----   -----   -----   ------
Total Fixed Charges                              $ 362   $ 390   $ 408   $ 461   $  447
                                                 =====   =====   =====   =====   ======
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                2.64    1.96    1.78    1.70     3.22
                                                 =====   =====   =====   =====   ======
</TABLE>

(A)  The term "earnings" shall be defined as pretax income from continuing
     operations. Add to pretax income the amount of fixed charges adjusted to
     exclude the amount of any interest capitalized during the period.

(B)  Fixed Charges represent (a) interest, whether expensed or capitalized, (b)
     amortization of debt discount, premium and expense and (c) an estimate of
     interest implicit in rentals.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-31264

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CHRISTOPHER R. WILLIS,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 3:05-CR-203-1

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Christopher R. Willis has moved for 

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). 

Willis has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the 

relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 4, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-31264 Document: 00512825692 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/04/2014
No. 13-31264

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is 

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 13-31264 Document: 00512825692 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/04/2014
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2




The Board of Directors
Group Maintenance America Corp.:


We consent to the use of our reports included herein and to the reference to our
firm under the heading "Experts" in the prospectus.


                                            /s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP


Houston, Texas
    
October 16, 1997
#### IN RE: KENNY G ENTERPRISES, LLC, Debtor. Kenneth Gharib, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Thomas H. Casey, Chapter 7 Trustee, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 17-55270

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 18, 2017 *

Filed December 26, 2017

Kenneth Gharib, Pro Se

Steve Burnell, Irvine, CA, Kathleen J. McCarthy, Esquire, Bankruptcy Counsel, The Law Office of Thomas H. Casey, Ran-cho Santa Margarita, CA, for Defendant-Appellee

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Kenneth Gharib appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his bankruptcy appeal for failure to prosecute. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 158(d) and 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. *Morrissey v. Stuteville (In re Morrissey),*349 F.3d 1187, 1190 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Gharib’s appeal because, despite being required by the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure to take certain actions within 14 days of filing the appeal, Gharib failed to do so more than six months after appealing. *See*Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8003(a)(2) (an appellant’s failure to take steps to prosecute a bankruptcy appeal may be grounds for dismissal); *In re Morrissey,*349 F.3d at 1190-91 (dismissal for noncompliance with procedural rules is proper, without explicit consideration of alternative sanctions, where procedural defects are egregious); *Fitzsimmons v. Nolden (In re Fitzsimmons),*920 F.2d 1468, 1473-75 (9th Cir. 1990) (affirming dismissal for failure to prosecute where appellant did not timely serve the designation of record, failed to take prompt steps to have reporter’s transcripts prepared, and failed to post the necessary fees or contact reporter until after the filing of the motion to dismiss).

The disti'ict court did not abuse its discretion by denying Gharib’s motion for rehearing because Gharib did not identify any error in the district court’s order dismissing his appeal. *See*Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8022(a)(2); *United States v. Fowler (In re Fowler),*394 F.3d 1208, 1214-15 (9th Cir. 2005) (setting forth standard of- review and requiring a motion for rehearing to state with particularity each point of law or fact a court overlooked).

Because we affirm the district court’s order dismissing the appeal, we do not consider Gharib’s challenges to the bankruptcy court’s decisions or the district court’s order .denying Gharib’s request for release. *See In re Morrissey,*349 F.3d at 1190; *Al-Torki v. Kaempen,*78 F.3d 1381, 1386 (9th Cir. 1996).

*391Gharib’s requests for judicial notice (Docket Entry Nos. 8,19) are denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit
                                                                            99.2


                 BROWN-BENCHMARK PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

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





In connection with the filing of Brown-Benchmark Properties Limited
Partnership's (the "Partnership") Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ending June 30, 2002 with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Timothy M. Gisriel, the Chief Financial Officer of
Brown-Benchmark AGP, Inc., Administrative General Partner of the Partnership,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 Partnership.



By: /s/Timothy M. Gisriel

Timothy M. Gisriel
Chief Financial Officer
Brown-Benchmark AGP, Inc.
Administrative General Partner
August 6, 2002
<Page>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 12d

                            PSEG ENERGY HOLDINGS LLC
               COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                          For the Years Ended
                                                               December 31,
                                                 --------------------------------------
                                                  2003    2002     2001    2000    1999
                                                 -----   ------   -----   -----   -----
                                                        (Millions, except ratios)
<S>                                              <C>     <C>      <C>     <C>     <C>
Earnings as Defined in Regulation S-K (A):

Pre-tax Income (Loss) from
   Continuing Operations                         $ 261   $ (365)  $ 237   $ 183   $ 153
Loss/(Income) from Equity Investees,
   Net of Distributions                             60       (2)    (59)    (16)     10
Fixed Charges                                      230      231     199     161     108
Capitalized Interest                               (11)     (12)    (13)    (21)     (6)
                                                 -----   ------   -----   -----   -----
Earnings (Loss)                                  $ 540   $ (148)  $ 364   $ 307   $ 265
                                                 =====   ======   =====   =====   =====

Fixed Charges as Defined in Regulation S-K (B)

Interest Expense                                 $ 229   $  229   $ 196   $ 158   $ 105
Interest Factor in Rentals                           1        2       3       3       3
                                                 -----   ------   -----   -----   -----
Total Fixed Charges                              $ 230   $  231   $ 199   $ 161   $ 108
                                                 =====   ======   =====   =====   =====

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges (C)            2.35    (0.64)   1.83    1.91    2.45
                                                 =====   ======   =====   =====   =====
</TABLE>

(A)  The term "earnings" is defined as pretax income from continuing operations
     before income or loss from equity investees plus distributed income from
     equity investees. Add to pretax income the amount of fixed charges adjusted
     to exclude the amount of any interest capitalized during the period.

(B)  Fixed Charges represent (a) interest, whether expensed or capitalized, (b)
     amortization of debt discount, premium and expense (c) an estimate of
     interest implicit in rentals.

(C)  The ratio of earnings to fixed charges for the year ended December 31,
     2002, was (0.64), as noted above, which represents a deficiency of $379
     million.
# C_2023179EN.01004402.xml

| 22.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/44

---

Order of the General Court of 14 March 2023 — Juvin v Parliament

(Case T-241/22) (1)

(Action for annulment - Law governing the Institutions - Member of Parliament - Decision excluding from participation in election observation delegations of the Parliament until the end of the term of office - Measure of internal organisation of the work of the Parliament - No effect on the conditions under which the mandate of a Member of Parliament is exercised - Act not open to challenge - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2023/C 179/65)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Hervé Juvin (Paris, France) (represented by: F.-P. Vos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: D. Moore and T. Lukácsi, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Decision D 301936 of the Co-Chairs of the Democracy Support and Election Coordination Group of the European Parliament of 3 March 2022 to exclude him from all participation in the election observation delegations of the Parliament until the end of his term of office as a Member of Parliament (2019-2024).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

| 2. | Mr Hervé Juvin shall pay the costs, including those relating to the interim proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Hervé Juvin shall pay the costs, including those relating to the interim proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 244, 27.6.2022.

---
**U.S.-Japan High-Speed Rail 1212 New York Ave., NW, Suite 700** 

**Washington, DC 20005 http://www.usjhsr.com/** 

Videos of Gangway of High-Speed Fixed Consist Trainsets

1. Train traveling at high speed (Highspeed.wmv: 0:35)

**In this video, the train is moving at a high speed of 240 km/h ( 150 mph). The split screen to the**  **right of the video shows the view from the driver’s cab . One sees images of the tracks and** 

**catenaries in front of the train as the train moves forward. We see a passenger in a wheelchair**  **moving in between cars. He moves away from the screen and into the other car. There is**  **minimal discernible lateral movement as the passenger moves through the gangway. At all times,**  **the passageway meets current ADA dimensional requiremen ts. As he moves into the other car,**  **the door automatically opens. The last part of the video s hows him moving back from the other** 

**car towards the viewer.**

2. Train operation through a turnout (Turnout.wmv; 0:28)

**In this video, the train travels through the tightest tur nout on the main line of Japan’s Tokaido**  **Shinkansen. The train is traveling at around 43 mph through a No. 18 turnout with a curve**  **radius of 1100 meters (1309 feet). The wheelchair is set on the plates in between cars. We see** 

**little lateral motion around the wheelchair. At all times, the passageway meets current ADA**  **dimensional requirements. The right-hand split scree n shows the train traveling on the alignment.** 

3. Main line operation (Main line.wmv; 2:00)

**This video features the train traveling through different cur ve radii. The first part of the video**  **shows the train traveling at the maximum operating speed of 77 mph through a 600-meter (1969-**  **foot) curve radius. During this time, the wheelchair is set in the gangway connecting the two**  **cars to show how stable the train is while moving through a curve. At all times, the passageway**  **meets current ADA dimensional requirements. The last part of the video shows the train**  **traveling through a tight curve of 400-meter (1312-foot) curve r adius, which would typically**  **have a maximum operating speed of 63 mph. A passenger in a wheelchair moves easily from**  **one car to another. He stops briefly on the connecti ng plates to show how little lateral or vertical**  **movement there is even though the train is moving through a tight curve. This is the sharpest**  **curve in commercial operation of the Tokaido Shinkansen in Japan, which is tighter than planned**  **for the U.S. operation. The video highlights minimized i nter-car motion during tight curve**  **negotiations.**
Facilities that Utilize Both SNCR and Mercury Control 

Plant Name Unit ID State Name Modeled Fuels Capacity 

(MW) 

Edge Moor 3 Delaware Bituminous 86.0 

Edge Moor 4 Delaware Bituminous 174 

Indian River Generating Station 4 Delaware Bituminous 405 

Indian River Generating Station 3 Delaware Bituminous, 

Subbituminous 153 

Vermilion 1 Illinois Subbituminous 84.0 

Herbert A Wagner 2 Maryland Subbituminous 135 

Salem Harbor 1 Massachusetts Bituminous 82.0 

Salem Harbor 3 Massachusetts Bituminous 150 

Salem Harbor 2 Massachusetts Bituminous 80.0 

B L England 2 New Jersey Bituminous, 

Subbituminous 155 

C R Huntley Generating Station 68 New York Bituminous, 

Subbituminous 190 

C R Huntley Generating Station 67 New York Bituminous, 

Subbituminous 190 

Dunkirk Generating Station 3 New York Bituminous, 

Subbituminous 185 

Dunkirk Generating Station 1 New York Bituminous, 

Subbituminous 75.0 

Taconite Harbor Energy Center 3 Minnesota Subbituminous 68.0 

Taconite Harbor Energy Center 2 Minnesota Subbituminous 67.0 

Taconite Harbor Energy Center 1 Minnesota Subbituminous 65.0 

Source: NEEDS v4.10 

July 6, 2012