alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                        ITEM 6. (A)

                                        EXHIBIT 11

                      STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
                  (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT FOR NET INCOME PER SHARE)



                                                                     SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                                          JUNE 30,
                                                                ---------------------------
                                                                      2000           1999
                                                                -----------------  --------
<S>                                                             <C>                <C>
Net income                                                      $          13,473  $ 11,528
Less:  Preferred stock dividends                                               85        84
                                                                -----------------  --------
Net income applicable to common stock                           $          13,388  $ 11,444

Weighted average common shares outstanding-  basic and diluted
                                                                          937,865   919,520

Net Income per common share-basic and diluted                   $           14.27  $  12.44
</TABLE>


<PAGE>
2023 IL 127412

IN THE

SUPREME COURT

OF

THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

(Docket No. 127412) 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Appellee, v. GERMEL DOSSIE, Appellant.

Opinion filed February 2, 2023.

PER CURIAM

OPINION

¶ 1 In this case, two Justices of this court have recused themselves, and the 

remaining members of the court are divided so that it is not possible to secure the 

constitutionally required concurrence of four judges for a decision (see Ill. Const. 

1970, art. VI, § 3). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The effect of this dismissal 

is the same as an affirmance by an equally divided court of the decision under 

review but is of no precedential value. See Perlman v. First National Bank of 

Chicago, 60 Ill. 2d 529, 530 (1975). 

¶ 2 CUNNINGHAM and ROCHFORD, JJ., took no part.
Exhibit 32








CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Entia Biosciences, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Marvin S. Hausman, M.D., Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 results of operations of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014.





Dated:  July 27, 2015








By:  Marvin S. Hausman, M.D.


Chief Executive Officer, President, Acting Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Executive Officer)


(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DOUGLAS FLAUGHER,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00727-DMR 

ORDER RE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION 

FOR APPOINTMENT OF PERMANENT 

HOUSING

Re: Dkt. No. 16

On May 31, 2017, the court dismissed this action without prejudice for failure to state a 

claim. [Docket No. 15]. Following the dismissal, Plaintiff filed a “Motion for Appointment of 

Permanent Housing,” in which he requests an affordable housing assignment. [Docket No. 16]. 

Plaintiff’s request is beyond the scope of this court’s authority, so the court cannot grant the relief 

Plaintiff seeks. Additionally, Plaintiff’s Complaint has been dismissed, so Plaintiff’s case is now 

closed. The court will not respond to similar future submissions. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 8, 2017

______________________________________

Donna M. Ryu

United States Magistrate Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Donna M. Ryu
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT


TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Annual Report of SunSi Energies Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michel Laporte, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001, that:





The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: August 31, 2009





/s/ Michel LaporteChief Executive Officer
Salud Cardíaca

Posiblemente crea que la 

enfermedad cardíaca sólo afecta 

a los hombres; sin embargo, esto 

no es cierto. La enfermedad 

cardíaca es la principal causa de 

muerte en las mujeres. 

La FDA tiene consejos para ayudarle 

a tomar buenas decisiones acerca de 

su salud cardíaca. 

La Oficina de Salud 

de la Mujer de la FDA

www.fda.gov/womenshearthealth 

Obtenga información 

acerca de la aspirina. El uso diario de la aspirina para prevenir 

un ataque cardíaco o un derrame 

cerebral no es adecuado para todos.

• Pregunte a su proveedor de atención médica 

si debe tomar aspirina. 

• Si la aspirina es adecuada para usted, 

averigüe:

‐qué cantidad debe tomar.

‐con qué frecuencia debe tomarla.

‐cuánto tiempo debe tomar aspirina. Algunos 

productos combinan aspirina con otros 

ingredientes y no deben usarse a largo plazo.

• Informe a su proveedor de atención médica 

todos los medicamentos y suplementos 

que toma. Su riesgo de sangrar puede 

ser mayor si toma aspirina junto con otros 

medicamentos, vitaminas o hierbas.

Conozca las señales de

un ataque cardíaco.

Las señales de un ataque cardíaco 

pueden ser diferentes entre las mujeres 

y para los hombres.

• Dolor en el pecho o en la espalda entre los 

hombros (dolor fuerte o presión).

• Dolor fuerte en la parte superior del cuerpo 

(brazos, cuello, mandíbula, espalda, 

parte superior del estómago).

• Falta de aliento.

• Sudoración fría repentina.

• Cansancio inusual o inexplicable.

• Sensación de mareo o aturdimiento.
Salud Cardíaca

La Oficina de Salud de la Mujer de la FDA desarrolló esta hoja informativa. 

Para aprender más acerca de la salud cardíaca de las mujeres, visite el sitio web de la FDA 

www.fda.gov/womenshearthealth

2017

Consuma una dieta 

saludable para el 

corazón.

La información nutricional en la 

etiqueta de los alimentos puede 

ayudarle a tomar decisiones 

saludables.

• Elija alimentos con ‘bajo contenido de 

sal’ o ‘bajo contenido de sodio’.

• Limite los alimentos que tienen ‘grasas 

trans’. Demasiada grasa trans puede 

causar infartos.

• Disminuya el consumo de azúcar. 

El azúcar también se etiqueta como 

‘glucosa’, ‘fructosa’, ‘sacarosa’ y 

‘jarabe de maíz’. 

Controle sus 

condiciones de salud.

Los problemas de salud comunes, 

como presión arterial alta (hipertensión), diabetes y colesterol alto, 

pueden aumentar su riesgo de 

tener una enfermedad cardíaca.

• Tome sus medicamentos según las 

instrucciones. No deje de tomar sus 

medicamentos hasta que su médico 

se lo indique.

• Si tiene diabetes, controle su nivel 

de azúcar en la sangre.

• Analice su presión arterial y colesterol

• Pregunte a su médico cómo debe 

controlar sus problemas de salud 

durante el embarazo.

• Algunas mujeres necesitan 

un dispositivo para ayudar al 

funcionamiento del corazón. Hable con 

su médico acerca del dispositivo más 

adecuado para su problema cardíaco.
Motion Granted; Order filed December 17, 2015 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-15-00431-CR

____________

TATRON JAFAR WILLIAMS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1431281

ORDER

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal 

is wholly frivolous and without merit. Appellant has filed a motion asking to review the 

record and file a pro se brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Gainous v. 

State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant’s motion is GRANTED.

Accordingly, we hereby direct the Judge of the 262nd District Court to afford 

appellant an opportunity to view the trial record in accordance with local procedure; that 

the clerk of that court furnish the record to appellant on or before December 31, 2015;
that the clerk of that court certify to this court the date on which delivery of the record to 

appellant is made; and that appellant file his pro se brief with this court within thirty days 

of that date.

PER CURIAM
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1354 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1354

 To provide uniform criteria for the administrative acknowledgment and 
         recognition of Indian tribes, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 16, 2005

 Mr. Simmons (for himself, Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut, Mr. Shays, Ms. 
DeLauro, and Mr. Larson of Connecticut) introduced the following bill; 
            which was referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide uniform criteria for the administrative acknowledgment and 
         recognition of Indian tribes, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. UNIFORM CRITERIA FOR ADMINISTRATIVE ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND 
              RECOGNITION OF INDIAN TRIBES.

    (a) In General.--Federal acknowledgment or recognition shall not be 
granted to an Indian tribe unless the Indian tribe has met all of the 
criteria listed in part 83 of title 25, Code of Federal Regulations, as 
in effect on January 1, 2004. When issuing proposed findings and final 
determinations on Federal acknowledgment or recognition of an Indian 
tribe, the Secretary of the Interior shall publish in the Federal 
Register detailed findings on each of those criteria. Such findings 
shall be accompanied by a report under part 83 of title 25, Code of 
Federal Regulations as in effect on January 1, 2004. This section shall 
apply to all petitions regarding which such findings and report have 
not been issued as of the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Prohibition on Modification of Regulations.--Secretary of the 
Interior may not modify, amend, nullify, or change in any way the 
criteria listed in part 83 of title 25, Code of Federal Regulations, as 
in effect on January 1, 2004.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF REVOLVING DOOR EXEMPTION.

    Section 104(j) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education 
Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450i(j)) is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
Terry L. McILVOY, petitioner, v. Jeff NORMAN, Superintendent, Jefferson City Correctional Center.

No. 12-9103.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 22, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
#### Ernest B. MOORE, Petitioner—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 03-15844.

** United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 12, 2004.*

Decided April 23, 2004.

*466Ernest B. Moore, Inglewood, CA, pro se.

Hannah Horsley, Esq., Kevin V. Ryan, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before: HALL, O’SCANNLAIN, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.

*

This panel unanimously finds this case suit*466able for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Ernest B. Moore appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of *coram nobis.*We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

We review de novo the district court’s denial of a petition for writ of *coram nobis. Matus-Leva v. United States,*287 F.3d 758, 760 (9th Cir.2002). Moore entered his guilty plea in 1987 and did not file his petition for writ of *coram nobis*until 2003. Because Moore failed to demonstrate that valid reasons exist for not attacking the conviction earlier, he is not entitled to *coram nobis*relief. *See Matus-Leva,*287 F.3d at 760 (noting that the four requirements for *coram nobis*relief are conjunctive and “failure to meet any one of them is fatal”).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Victor Alfonso SEBREROS-CASTRO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9962.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
.AUSTIN.-rExAR 78711 

September14, 1976 

The Honorable William R. Knight, Jr. Opinion No. H-877 

Secretary 

Texas State Board of Dental Examiners Re: Whether a member 

718 Southwest Tower of the Dental Labora7th and Brazos Streets tory Advisory Board 

Austin, Texas 78701 is required to be a 

resident of the State 

of Texas. 

Dear Dr. Knight: 

You have asked if 

amember of the Dental 

an individual may continue to serve as 

Laboratory Advisory Board if he no longer 

resides in Texas. You advise that one member of the Board 

is moving his residence to the State of Colorado. We assume, 

without deciding, that the individual is in fact a resident 

of Colorado. 

Article 16, section 14 of the Texas Constitution provides: 

All civil officers shall reside within the 

State: and all district or county officers 

within their districts or counties, and 

shall keep their offices at such places as 

may be required by law; and failure to 

comply with this condition shall vacate 

the office so held. 

The Dental Laboratory Advisory Board is created in 

section 6(b) of article 4551f, V.T.C.S. Its members are 

clearly civil officers. Letter Advisory No. 63 (1973). 

p. 3695 
I 

. 

The Honorable William R. Knight, Jr. - page 2 (H-877) 

Accordingly, under the clear terms of the constitution 

a member of the Dental Laboratory Advisory Board who removes 

his residence outside of Texas vacates his office. See 

Prince v- Inman, 280 S.W.Zd 779 (Tex. Civ. App. -- Brmont 

mno wrm Cf. Whitmarsh s Buckle 

---4-l 

324 S.W.Zd 298 

(Tex. Civ. App. --ouston 1959, no wri Lamb v. State, 

267 S.W.Zd 285 (Tex. Civ. App. -- San AntonmS)n, no writ). 

SUMMARY 

A member of the Dental Laboratory Advisory 

Board vacates his office when he removes 

his residence outside the State of Texas. 

Very truly yours, 

JdHN L. HILL 

Attorney General of Texas 

Opinion Committee 

p. 3696
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.17-cv-00939-WHA (JSC)

ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE 

MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL

Re: Dkt. Nos. 627, 628 

Plaintiff Waymo LLC has filed an Administrative Motion to File under Seal Portions of its 

Letter Brief in Opposition to Anthony Levandowski’s Motion to Quash the Subpoena to Stroz 

Friedberg. (Dkt. No. 627-3.) Waymo seeks to seal a portion of this document “only because 

Defendants have designated the information confidential and/or highly confidential.” (Dkt. No 

627 at 2.1)

Under Civil Local Rule 79-5(e)(1), Defendants were therefore required within “4 days of 

the filing of the Administrative Motion to File Under Seal . . . [to file] a declaration as required by 

subsection 79-5(d)(1)(A) establishing that all of the designated material is sealable.” However, 

Defendants did not file a declaration in support of sealing. Accordingly, the administrative motion 

to file under seal is DENIED. Waymo shall file a public version of its brief consistent with this 

Order by no later than June 30th, 2017. See N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 79-5(f)(3).

This Order disposes of Docket Nos. 627 and 628. 

 

1 Record citations are to material in the Electronic Case File (“ECF”); pinpoint citations are to the 

ECF-generated page numbers at the top of the documents. 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 706 Filed 06/23/17 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 22, 2017 

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 706 Filed 06/23/17 Page 2 of 2
Larry Eugene MANN, petitioner, v. Michael D. CREWS, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.

No. 12-9672 (12A975).

Supreme Court of the United States

April 10, 2013.

Application for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice THOMAS and by him referred to the Court denied. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Order entered August 31, 2020

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05 - 20 - 00679 - CV JCB DALLAS, LLC, JCB, INC., J.C. BAMFORD EXCAVATORS, LTD.,

AND JEREMY JOHNSON, Appellant s

V. ART GILFUS, Appellee On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. Dc - 19 - 20010

ORDER Before the Court is appellee’s August 27, 2020 unopposed motion for extension of time to file his brief

. We GRANT th e motion and ORDER the brief be filed no later than October 6, 2020.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
Reginald CHAPMAN, petitioner, v. Marcus HARDY, Warden.

No. 12-9630.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
NO. 12-13-00186-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

ALAN UTZ & ASSOCIATES, INC., § APPEAL FROM THE 7TH

APPELLANT

V. 

ALL SAINTS EPISCOPAL SCHOOL,

RED DOT CORPORATION, CECIL 

PADGETT D/B/A PADGETT & SON

MASONRY & PADGETT MASONRY, § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

LLC, COOPER PLASTERING, INC.,

ALTO CONCRETE FLOORS,

BREEDLOVE SITE SERVICES, LLC

D/B/A BREEDLOVE NURSERY AND

LANDSCAPE COMPANY, AND JOHN

ODEN D/B/A METAL & MORE, INC.,

APPELLEES § SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Appellant Alan Utz & Associates, Inc. has filed a motion to dismiss its appeal and has 

certified that all other parties to the appeal have been given notice of the filing of this motion. 

Because Alan Utz & Associates, Inc. has met the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 42.1(a)(1), the motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed. 

Opinion delivered April 9, 2014.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)
COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

APRIL 9, 2014

NO. 12-13-00186-CV

ALAN UTZ & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

Appellant

V.

ALL SAINTS EPISCOPAL SCHOOL, RED DOT CORPORATION,

CECIL PADGETT D/B/A PADGETT & SON MASONRY &

PADGETT MASONRY, LLC, COOPER PLASTERING, INC.,

ALTO CONCRETE FLOORS, BREEDLOVE SITE SERVICES, LLC

D/B/A BREEDLOVE NURSERY AND LANDSCAPE COMPANY,

AND JOHN ODEN D/B/A METAL & MORE, INC.,

Appellees

 

 Appeal from the 7th Judicial District Court

 of Smith County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. 12-1098-A) 

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the motion of the Appellant to dismiss the 

appeal herein, and the same being considered, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and 

DECREED by this Court that the motion is granted the appeal be dismissed, and that this 

decision be certified to the court below for observance.

By per curiam opinion.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.
Amendment #4 to the Trust Agreement



 Exhibit 10(e) 
 AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR 
  
 TO 
  
 GRANTOR TRUST AGREEMENT 

 
 THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the thirty-first day of January, 1996, by and
between THE BANK OF NEW YORK COMPANY, INC., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York (hereinafter referred to as the “Company”), and THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, N.A., a corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the United States of America (hereinafter referred to as the “Trustee”), 
  
 W  I  T  N  E  S  S  E  T  H  : 
  
 WHEREAS, the Company and the Trustee entered into a Grantor Trust Agreement dated as of November 16, 1993 (as amended from
time to time, the “Agreement”); 
  
 WHEREAS, United
States Trust Company of New York has merged into The Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. which has assumed United States Trust Company of New York’s obligations under the Agreement by operation of law; 
  
 WHEREAS, Article TWELFTH of the Agreement provides that the Company may amend
the Agreement; and 
  
 WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend
Exhibit I to the Agreement; 
  
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Company and
the Trustee agree that the Agreement is amended as follows, effective as of February 1, 1996: 
  
 Exhibit I to the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting Exhibit I in its entirety and substituting therefor Exhibit I in the form attached hereto. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed in their respective names by their duly
authorized officers under their corporate seals as of the day and year first above written. 
  

					
	 ATTEST:
	 	 	 	 THE BANK OF NEW YORK COMPANY, INC.

			
	/s/    THOMAS E. ANGERS        	 	 	 	/s/    DENO D. PAPAGEORGE      
	
	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 Deno D. Papageorge
 Senior Executive Vice President


  

					
	 ATTEST:
	 	 THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, N.A.

			
	/s/    WILLIAM SCHRODER        	 	 By:
	 	/s/    MARTHA C. DOLAN      
	
	 	 	 	

	 	 	 	 	 Martha C. Dolan
 Vice President


  

 -1- 








 Exhibit 10(e) 
  
 EXHIBIT I 
  

	1.	The Bank of New York Company, Inc. Excess Benefit Plan 

  

	2.	The Bank of New York Company, Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan 

  

	3.	Agreements between The Bank of New York Company, Inc. and the following persons: 

  

			
	 Individual

	  	 Date of Agreement


	 Samuel F. Chevalier
	  	October 11, 1994
	 Richard D. Field
	  	October 11, 1994
	 Alan R. Griffith
	  	October 11, 1994
	 Joseph A. Grimaldi
	  	April 11, 1995
	 Gerald L. Hassell
	  	April 11, 1995
	 Newton P.S. Merrill
	  	October 11, 1994
	 Robert J. Mueller
	  	October 11, 1994
	 Richard A. Pace
	  	October 11, 1994
	 Thomas A. Renyi
	  	October 11, 1994

  

 - 2 -