alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 12

                                         FARMERS GROUP, INC.
                                          AND SUBSIDIARIES
                                      COMPUTATION OF THE RATIO
                                    OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                        (Amounts in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                       Years Ended December 31,
                                      1998          1997          1996          1995          1994 
                                   ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------

<S>                                <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>
Consolidated income before
 provision for taxes               $  950,562    $1,002,106    $  863,143    $  763,493    $  716,199

Add:
  Portion of rents
   representative of interest           7,444         7,120         6,707         7,315         7,368
  Interest                             43,935        45,031        52,883        29,836        18,276
                                   ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------
Income, as adjusted                $1,001,941    $1,054,257    $  922,733    $  800,644    $  741,843
                                   ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========

Fixed Charges:
  Portion of rents
   representative of interest      $    7,444         7,120    $    6,707    $    7,315    $    7,368
  Interest                             43,935        45,031        52,883        29,836        18,276
                                   ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------
Total fixed charges                $   51,379        52,151    $   59,590    $   37,151    $   25,644
                                   ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========

Ratio of earnings to fixed
 charges:                               19.5 x        20.2 x        15.5 x        21.5 x        28.9 x

</TABLE>
*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019*

*Change 13*

**AP7.17. APPENDIX 7.17**

**SHIPMENT HOLD CODES**

AP7.17-1

APPENDIX 7.17
**Exhibit 31.1**
**Certification**
I, James J. McGonigle, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Corporate Executive Board Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading 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 inall material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:   (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;   (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and   (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):   (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and   (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: November 5, 2004
/s/ James J. McGonigleJames J. McGonigleChief Executive Officer
No. 11-95.

#### Dos Picos, L.L.C., fka Dos Picos Land Limited Partnership, et al., Petitioners v. Pima County, Arizona.

565 U.S. 882, 132 S. Ct. 250,

181 L. Ed. 2d 144,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5437.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division Two, denied.

Same case below, 225 Ariz. 458, 240 P.3d 853.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 131 (Thursday, July 9, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37108]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18165]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-270-000]


Young Gas Storage Company, Ltd.; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

July 2, 1998.
    Take notice that on June 29, 1998, Young Gas Storage Company, Ltd. 
(Young), tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
Original Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed in Appendix A to the 
filing, to be effective August 1, 1998.
    Young states that the purpose of this compliance filing is to 
conform Young's tariff to requirements of Order No. 587-G that 
interstate pipelines transporting pursuant to Section 284.223 of the 
Commission's Regulations conform their tariffs to include Version 1.2 
of the GISB Standards.
    Young further states that copies of this filing have been served on 
Young's jurisdictional customers and public bodies.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as provided 
in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18165 Filed 7-8-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
* 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

September 30, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-40687 

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

JOSE ALEXANDER ROMERO RODRIGUEZ,also known as Carlos Garcia

Defendant - Appellant

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas 

USDC No. 1:02-CR-426-ALL 

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

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

This court previously affirmed the sentence imposed

following Jose Alexander Romero Rodriguez’s resentencing. United

States v. Rodriguez, No. 04-40687 (5th Cir. Dec. 17, 2004)

(unpublished). The Supreme Court vacated and remanded for

further consideration in light of United States v. Booker, 125

S. Ct. 738 (2005). We requested and received supplemental letter

briefs addressing the impact of Booker. 
No.04-40687 

-2-

Rodriguez argues that the district court erred by sentencing

him under a mandatory guidelines scheme. He contends that the

district court’s error is not subject to plain error review

because it is structural. He also asserts, based on the nature

of the error, that prejudice should be presumed. Rodriguez

concedes that his structural error and presumed prejudice

arguments are foreclosed and raises them simply to preserve

further review. See United States v. Malveaux, 411 F.3d 558, 561

n.9 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (July 11, 2005)

(No. 05-5297). 

Because Rodriguez did not preserve his arguments before the

district court, plain error review applies. See United States v.

Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 520-21 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert.

filed (Mar. 31, 2005) (No. 04-9517). To establish plain error

under Mares, Rodriguez must demonstrate that the district court

would have reached a significantly different result had he been

sentenced under advisory guidelines. See Mares, 402 F.3d at 521. 

As Rodriguez concedes, he cannot make this showing. 

Booker does not affect our prior holding that AlmendarezTorres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), has not been

overruled. Accordingly, the we REINSTATE our prior decision and

judgment affirming the district court.
No. 10-10510.

#### Theodore O. Wilson, Petitioner v. Arnold Schwarzenegger, et al.

565 U.S. 839, 132 S. Ct. 148,

181 L. Ed. 2d 65,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6304.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
No. 11-5394.

#### Andre Porter, Petitioner v. George Lombardi, et al.

565 U.S. 905, 132 S. Ct. 305,

181 L. Ed. 2d 186,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5507.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
9245143

THIRD SUPPLEMENT TO FINAL APPLICATION UNDER 49 U.S.C.§ 47134 FOR

PRIVATIZATION OF CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

The City of Chicago (the “City”) hereby supplements the Final Application, filed October

14, 2008 (“Final Application”), along with the first Supplement submitted on October 15, 2008

and the second Supplement submitted on March 5, 2009.

The City is in continuing deliberations regarding the completion of the Midway Airport

privatization. The pace and direction continues to be dictated by conditions in the global credit

and capital markets. The City intends to complete the privatization process at the earliest

practicable date. The City will report back to the Federal Aviation Administration by April 30,

2010 on further developments with respect to the process to select a private operator.

The date of this Supplement is January 29, 2010.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 136 (Thursday, July 16, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38303-38304]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18956]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 522 and 556


Implantation or Injectable Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; 
Spectinomycin Solution; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a final 
rule that appeared in the Federal Register of May 1, 1998 (63 FR 
24106). The document amended the animal drug regulations to reflect 
approval of a new animal drug application (NADA)

[[Page 38304]]

filed by Pharmacia & Upjohn Co. The NADA provides for veterinary 
prescription use of Adspec<SUP>TM</SUP> (spectinomycin) sterile 
solution for cattle. The document incorrectly listed the tolerance for 
spectinomycin residues in cattle muscle. This document corrects that 
error.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 16, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George K. Haibel, Center for 
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-133), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 301-594-1644.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 98-11686 appearing on page 24106 
in the Federal Register of Friday, May 1, 1998, the following 
correction is made:


Sec. 556.600  [Corrected]

    1. On page 24107, in the second column, in Sec. 556.600 
Spectinomycin, in paragraph (c), in the fourth line, ``0.4'' is 
corrected to read ``0.25''.

    Dated: July 9, 1998.
 Stephen F. Sundlof,
 Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
[FR Doc. 98-18956 Filed 7-15-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
83

Section C: Recommended Funding Levels, by State

Colorado

Program Intervention Budgets: 2014

Recommended Annual Investment $52.9 million

Deaths in State Caused by Smoking

Annual average smoking-attributable deaths 5,100

Youth aged 0-17 projected to die from smoking 90,600

Annual Costs Incurred in State from Smoking

Total medical $1,891 million

State Revenue from Tobacco Sales and Settlement

FY 2012 tobacco tax revenue $203.4 million

FY 2012 tobacco settlement payment $90.8 million

Total state revenue from tobacco sales and settlement $294.2 million

Percent Tobacco Revenue to Fund at Recommended Level 18%

Annual Total (Millions) Annual Per Capita

Minimum Recommended Minimum Recommended

I. State and Community Interventions 

Multiple social resources working together will 

have the greatest long-term population impact.

$13.2 $16.4 $2.54 $3.16

II. Mass-Reach Health Communication Interventions 

Media interventions work to prevent smoking initiation, 

promote cessation, and shape social norms.

$6.9 $9.9 $1.33 $1.91

III. Cessation Interventions 

Tobacco use treatment is effective and highly cost-effective. $12.4 $19.7 $2.39 $3.80

IV. Surveillance and Evaluation 

Publicly funded programs should be accountable and 

demonstrate effectiveness.

$3.3 $4.6 $0.63 $0.89

V. Infrastructure, Administration, and Management 

Complex, integrated programs require experienced 

staff to provide fiscal management, accountability, 

and coordination.

$1.6 $2.3 $0.31 $0.44

TOTAL $37.4 $52.9 $7.20 $10.20

Note: A justification for each program element and the rationale for the budget estimates are provided in Section A. The funding estimates presented are based on adjustments for changes in population and cost-of-living increases since Best Practices—2007 was published. The actual 

funding required for implementing programs will vary depending on state characteristics, such as prevalence of tobacco use, sociodemographic 

factors, and other factors. See Appendix E for data sources on deaths, costs, revenue, and state-specific factors. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • Office on Smoking and Health

www.cdc.gov/tobacco • tobaccoinfo@cdc.gov • 1 (800) CDC-INFO or 1 (800) 232-4636 

2014
*DoD 4000.25-7-M, March 2004*

DLM 4000.25, Volume 4

**DIC FD1/FD2/GD1/GD2 FORMAT**

**MATERIEL RETURN PROGRAM CREDIT**

114

	APPENDIX 3.11

1
96

Section C: Recommended Funding Levels, by State

Louisiana

Program Intervention Budgets: 2014

Recommended Annual Investment $59.6 million

Deaths in State Caused by Smoking

Annual average smoking-attributable deaths 7,200

Youth aged 0-17 projected to die from smoking 98,400

Annual Costs Incurred in State from Smoking

Total medical $1,892 million

State Revenue from Tobacco Sales and Settlement

FY 2012 tobacco tax revenue $140.0 million

FY 2012 tobacco settlement payment $141.2 million

Total state revenue from tobacco sales and settlement $281.2 million

Percent Tobacco Revenue to Fund at Recommended Level 21%

Annual Total (Millions) Annual Per Capita

Minimum Recommended Minimum Recommended

I. State and Community Interventions 

Multiple social resources working together will 

have the greatest long-term population impact.

$15.6 $19.5 $3.39 $4.24

II. Mass-Reach Health Communication Interventions 

Media interventions work to prevent smoking initiation, 

promote cessation, and shape social norms.

$5.7 $8.1 $1.24 $1.76

III. Cessation Interventions 

Tobacco use treatment is effective and highly cost-effective. $15.1 $24.2 $3.28 $5.26

IV. Surveillance and Evaluation 

Publicly funded programs should be accountable and 

demonstrate effectiveness.

$3.6 $5.2 $0.79 $1.13

V. Infrastructure, Administration, and Management 

Complex, integrated programs require experienced 

staff to provide fiscal management, accountability, 

and coordination.

$1.8 $2.6 $0.40 $0.56

TOTAL $41.8 $59.6 $9.10 $12.95

Note: A justification for each program element and the rationale for the budget estimates are provided in Section A. The funding estimates presented are based on adjustments for changes in population and cost-of-living increases since Best Practices—2007 was published. The actual 

funding required for implementing programs will vary depending on state characteristics, such as prevalence of tobacco use, sociodemographic 

factors, and other factors. See Appendix E for data sources on deaths, costs, revenue, and state-specific factors. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • Office on Smoking and Health

www.cdc.gov/tobacco • tobaccoinfo@cdc.gov • 1 (800) CDC-INFO or 1 (800) 232-4636 

2014
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63
OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE
  1.
    
    The Quarterly Report Under Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2006 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Quarterly Report Under Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended March 31, 2006
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Electric City Corp. and its subsidiaries.
 /s/ Jeffrey R. MistarzJeffrey R. MistarzChief Financial OfficerMay 15, 2006
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 140 (Wednesday, July 22, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39284-39285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19454]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Project No. 77-110]


Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Technical Workshop on 
Action Alternatives, Water Rights, and Water Balance Modeling

July 16, 1998.
    On May 5, 1998, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
(Commission) issued notice of a site visit and scoping meetings 
pursuant to the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 
in support of the Commission's decision on a proposed amendment to the 
license for the Potter Valley Project (PVP; FERC No. 77-110). The 
proposed amendment involves changes in the minimum flow requirements at 
the project, consisting of increased releases to the Eel River, which 
would result in overall decreased diversions to the Russian River. The 
PVP is licensed to Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and is 
located in Lake and Mendocino counties. California.
    The purpose of this notice is to advise all parties of a technical 
workshop that will be held to obtain additional information on the 
proposed amendment, its relationship to existing water rights, and 
available modeling approaches to evaluate water balances between the 
two river basins. This technical workshop will be held at the Ukiah 
Valley Conference Center, 200 S. School Street, Ukiah, California, on 
August 11, 1998, from 9 am to 5 pm. All interested parties are invited 
to attend.
    Three subjects will be covered at the workshop: (1) PG&E's recently 
completed Implementation Plan associated with the proposed license 
amendment; (2) existing water rights in the Eel and Russian rivers; and 
(3) comparison of three alternative water balance models that have been 
identified in filings for this proceeding. The first half of the 
workshop will consist of presentations by staff from PG&E, speaking on 
their Implementation Plan, and by staff from the California State Water 
Resources Control Board, speaking on water rights issues. The second 
half of the workshop will consist of presentations by the three parties 
offering different water balance models: PG&E, the Round Valley Tribes, 
and the Sonoma County Water Agency, followed by discussion of the 
models. The goals of these discussions are to understand the relative 
differences among the models and to attempt to achieve consensus on the 
best available

[[Page 39285]]

water balance model for application to the PVP EIS.

    For additional information on this workshop. please contact the 
FERC Project Manager, Dr. John M. Mudre at (202) 219-1208.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-19454 Filed 7-21-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 10-1368.

#### Ali Nejad, Petitioner v. Georgia.

565 U.S. 818, 132 S. Ct. 101,

181 L. Ed. 2d 28,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6629.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Georgia denied.

Same case below, 305 Ga. App. 883, 700 S.E.2d 886.