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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          263861
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      679
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                264540
<PP&E>                                         1535260
<DEPRECIATION>                                  383631
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1457835
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           796331
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      526504
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1457835
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                162656
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     1667
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 87260
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               54851
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  18878
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              18878
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     18878
<EPS-BASIC>                                       4.68
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     4.68


</TABLE>
# C_2023271EN.01002102.xml

| 31.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/21

---

Order of the President of the Court of 16 March 2023 — European Commission v Slovak Republic

(Case C-668/22) (1)

(2023/C 271/30)

Language of the case: Slovak

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 463, 5.12.2022.

---
### Jim Wilkinson - Re: Ozone Authority SIP

The lead notice may be removed on December 6, 2012. The ozone notice may be removed on January 5, 2013. Thanks

>>> Samantha Kappalman 11/8/2012 1:47 PM >>> Ok, we'll need to prioritize what's up there. Some things will need to come off. For both of your SIP links, please send us an email when we can come down.

Samantha Kappalman Director of Communications Maryland Department of the Environment 410-537-3010 443-934-1023 (cell) www.mde.state.md.us

>>> Mary Jane Rutkow ski 11/8/2012 1:44 PM >>> Good Afternoon Next week we will need to post anot her State Implementation Plan (SIP) on our web site. I need to have a link to the SIP on the MDE home page under Notices and Aler ts, "110 Ozone Authority SIP". This link needs to be in place for a minimum of 30 days from the date we post the documents. We should have the documents on the server early next week.. Thanks for your assistance! From: Mary Jane Rutkowski
To: Kappalman, Samantha
Date: 11/8/2012 1:53 PM Subject: Re: Ozone Authority SIP
CC: T hunell, Ro g er 

### Pa g e 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Setting

... 12/10/2012 4:46:34 PM
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                   CERTIFICATE OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2002 (the "Periodic Report"), I, T. Kevin DeNicola, Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Lyondell Chemical Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)  the Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
     or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. Section 78m or
     78o(d)); and

(2)  the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
     Lyondell Chemical Company.

Date: March 11, 2003              /s/ T. KEVIN DENICOLA
                               -------------------------------------------------
                               T. Kevin DeNicola
                               Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
No. 11-10293.

#### Adamcik *v.*Idaho.

Sup. Ct. Idaho. Certiorari denied.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

April 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 132570 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 132570 

 COA: 271300 

Jackson CC: 99-094247-FC 

PRENTICE DEVELL WATKINS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 6, 2006 

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

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d0416 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

April 24, 2007 

 Clerk
# C_2022037EN.01005101.xml

| 24.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/51

---

Action brought on 24 November 2021 — Medela v EUIPO (MAXFLOW)

(Case T-744/21)

(2022/C 37/66)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Medela Holding AG (Baar, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Hartmann and S. Fröhlich, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU word mark MAXFLOW — Application for registration No 18 328 426

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 August 2021 in Case R 876/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1991
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1991
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 1927-140]

                    On March 31, 2022, PacifiCorp submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) evidence of its application for a Clean Water Act section 401(a)(1) water quality certification filed with Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, in conjunction with the above captioned project. Pursuant to section 401 of the Clean Water Act [1]                                          and section 4.34(b)(5) of the Commission's regulations,[2]                                          a state certifying agency is deemed to have waived its certifying authority if it fails or refuses to act on a certification request within a reasonable period of time, which is one year after the date the certification request was received. Accordingly, we hereby notify the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality of the following:                

Date that Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Received the Certification Request: February 25, 2022.

If Oregon Department of Environmental Quality fails or refuses to act on the water quality certification request on or before February 25, 2023, then the agency certifying authority is deemed waived pursuant to section 401(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).

Dated: April 1, 2022.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

# Footnotes

1.                             33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).                    
        Back to Citation      

2.                             18 CFR 4.34(b)(5).                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2022-07405 Filed 4-6-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    EXHIBIT 11


COMPUTATION OF NET EARNINGS AND SHARES
USED IN ARRIVING AT NET EARNINGS PER SHARE
THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996


                                                      Primary and Fully Diluted

                                                         Three Months Ended
                                                         September 30, 1996
                                                         ------------------

Earnings:

Net earnings                                             $      1,052,863
                                                         ----------------
Less:  Dividends on preferred stock                                   ---
                                                         ----------------
Net earnings applicable to common stock                  $      1,052,863
                                                         ================
Computation of weighted number of shares outstanding:

Shares outstanding on a diluted basis
                                                               5,455,300
                                                         ================
# C_2022037EN.01004001.xml

| 24.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/40

---

Action brought on 31 October 2021 — Peace United v EUIPO — 1906 Collins (MY BOYFRIEND IS OUT OF TOWN)

(Case T-699/21)

(2022/C 37/53)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Applicant: Peace United Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Artzimovitch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: 1906 Collins LLC (Miami, Florida, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark MY BOYFRIEND IS OUT OF TOWN — EU trade mark No 11 352 804

Procedure before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 July 2021 in Case R 276/2020-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in so far as, as a result of various errors of assessment in fact and in law, as well as a failure to fulfil the duty of good administration, the Board of Appeal found that EU trade mark No 11 352 804, MY BOYFRIEND IS OUT OF TOWN, had not been put to genuine use during the period at issue for the services claimed in Classes 41 and 43; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in so far as, as a result of various errors of assessment in fact and in law, as well as a failure to fulfil the duty of good administration, the Board of Appeal found that EU trade mark No 11 352 804, MY BOYFRIEND IS OUT OF TOWN, had not been put to genuine use during the period at issue for the services claimed in Classes 41 and 43;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 63(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in that the Board of Appeal erred in its assessment of the abusive nature of the action for revocation; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 63(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in that the Board of Appeal erred in its assessment of the abusive nature of the action for revocation;

| — | Infringement of Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in that the Board of Appeal erred in its assessment of the genuine use of the trade mark. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in that the Board of Appeal erred in its assessment of the genuine use of the trade mark.

---
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8603 

To require the Securities and Exchange Commission to revise the definition 

of a qualifying investment to include an equity security issued by a 

qualifying portfolio company, whether acquired directly from the company 

or in a secondary acquisition, for purposes of the exemption from registration for venture capital fund advisers under the Investment Advisers 

Act of 1940, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 16, 2020 

Mr. HOLLINGSWORTH (for himself and Mr. MCADAMS) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To require the Securities and Exchange Commission to revise 

the definition of a qualifying investment to include an 

equity security issued by a qualifying portfolio company, 

whether acquired directly from the company or in a 

secondary acquisition, for purposes of the exemption 

from registration for venture capital fund advisers under 

the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, 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, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8603 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Developing and Em3 powering our Aspiring Leaders Act of 2020’’. 

4 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

5 Not later than the end of the 180-day period begin6 ning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Securi7 ties and Exchange Commission shall— 

8 (1) revise the definition of a qualifying invest9 ment under paragraph (c) of section 275.203(l)–1 of 

10 title 17, Code of Federal Regulations, to include an 

11 equity security issued by a qualifying portfolio com12 pany, whether acquired directly from the company or 

13 in a secondary acquisition; and 

14 (2) revise paragraph (a) of such section to re15 quire, as a condition of a private fund qualifying as 

16 a venture capital fund under such paragraph, that 

17 the qualifying investments of the private fund are 

18 predominantly qualifying investments that were ac19 quired directly from a qualifying portfolio company. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
# C_2021471EN.01005502.xml

| 22.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 471/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 471/55

---

Action brought on 27 September 2021 — PricewaterhouseCoopers Belastingadviseurs v EUIPO — Haufe-Lexware (TAXMARC)

(Case T-619/21)

(2021/C 471/79)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: PricewaterhouseCoopers Belastingadviseurs NV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: R. Stoop, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Haufe-Lexware GmbH & Co. KG (Freiburg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark TAXMARC — Application for registration No 18 047 421

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 July 2021 in Case R 131/2021-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs of this application and order Haufe-Lexware to pay the costs of the proceedings before the Opposition Division and the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs of this application and order Haufe-Lexware to pay the costs of the proceedings before the Opposition Division and the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 71(1)(b) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 71(1)(b) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625.

---
# C_2023024EN.01003203.xml

| 23.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/32

---

Order of the President of the Court of 13 October 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Pesti Központi Kerületi Bíróság — Hungary) — PannonHitel Pénzügyi Zrt. v WizzAir Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.)

(Case C-51/22) (1)

(2023/C 24/45)

Language of the case: Hungarian

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 165, 19.4.2022.

---
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2
 
                              ACCOUNTANT'S CONSENT
 
The Board of Directors
Telegroup, Inc.:
 
  We consent to the use of our reports included herein and to the reference to
our firm under the heading "Experts" in the prospectus.
 
                                          KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP
 
Lincoln, Nebraska
June 18, 1997
See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions), 52.8(d) (“W hen 1

denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so.”).

NUMBER 13-08-00499-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

 

IN RE: JUAN GUTIERREZ AND GUADALUPE SAUCEDA

 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus and 

Motion for Emergency Temporary Relief

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam1

Relators, Juan Gutierrez and Guadalupe Sauceda, filed a petition for writ of

mandamus and a motion for emergency relief, by which they request that this Court direct

respondents/real parties in interest to verify signatures on a petition seeking to submit a

ballot initiative proposing an amendment to the Harlingen City Charter. Respondents/real

parties in interest, the City of Harlingen, Sylvia Trevino, Chris Boswell, Larry Galbreath,

Bobby Farris, Jay Meade, Robert Leftwich, and Thomas Hushen, filed a response on

August 25, 2008 which, inter alia, requests that this Court award sanctions against relators.

See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.11
2

The Court, having fully examined and considered the petition for writ of mandamus,

the motion for emergency relief, and the response thereto, is of the opinion that relators

have not shown themselves entitled to the relief sought. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus and the motion for emergency relief are

DENIED. Moreover, we deny the request for sanctions made by respondents/real parties

in interest.

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

on the 26th day of August, 2008.
##### 



EXHIBIT 23.1

Independent Auditors Consent

The Trustee and Unitholders
Archstone-Smith Operating Trust:

We consent to incorporation by reference in registration statements No.
333-89164 on Form S-3 of Archstone-Smith Operating Trust of our reports dated
January 24, 2003, except as to Note 18, which is as of February 12, 2003,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Archstone-Smith Operating Trust
and subsidiaries (formerly known as Archstone Communities Trust) as of December
31, 2002 and 2001, and the related consolidated statements of earnings,
unitholders equity, other common unitholders interest and comprehesive
income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2002, and the related schedule, which reports appear in the
December 31, 2002 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Archstone-Smith Operating
Trust.

KPMG LLP

Denver, Colorado
February 28, 2003