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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         262,572
<SECURITIES>                                    10,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,567,856
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,112,118
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,019,009
<PP&E>                                       2,705,140
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,161,438
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,785,106
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,910,511
<BONDS>                                      2,553,096
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,256
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,811,874
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,785,106
<SALES>                                      1,392,102
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,392,102
<CGS>                                        1,236,517
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,236,517
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,097,448
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (45,542)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,142,990)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,142,990)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,142,990)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.14)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Nicholas R. Schacht, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the quarterly report of Learning Tree International, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarter June 27, 2008 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of the operations of Learning Tree International, Inc.



|               |  |     |  |                        
|-------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|August 5, 2008 |  |     |  |                        
|               |  |    
|               |  | By: |  | /s/ Nicholas R. Schacht
|               |  |     |  | Nicholas R. Schacht    
|               |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2640 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2640

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide an exclusion from 
          gross income for discharge of consumer indebtedness.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 3, 2015

Mr. Peters (for himself and Mr. Hunter) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide an exclusion from 
          gross income for discharge of consumer indebtedness.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Consumer Debt Forgiveness Tax Relief 
Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME FOR DISCHARGE OF CONSUMER 
              INDEBTEDNESS.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 108(a) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of 
subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (E) 
and inserting ``, or'', and by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(F) the indebtedness discharged is qualified 
                consumer indebtedness.''.
    (b) Special Rules Relating to Qualified Consumer Indebtedness.--
Section 108 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(j) Special Rules Relating to Qualified Consumer Indebtedness.--
            ``(1) Qualified consumer indebtedness defined.--For 
        purposes of this section, the term `qualified consumer 
        indebtedness' means any indebtedness of a natural person 
        arising out of a transaction in which the money, property, or 
        services which are the subject of the transaction are primarily 
        for personal, family, or household purposes.
            ``(2) Overall limitation.--The aggregate amount of 
        discharged indebtedness treated as qualified consumer 
        indebtedness for the taxable year shall not exceed the excess 
        (if any) of--
                    ``(A) $2,500, over
                    ``(B) the aggregate amounts treated as qualified 
                consumer indebtedness with respect to such taxpayer for 
                all prior taxable years.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to indebtedness discharged after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                             PYRAMID BREWERIES INC.

                         EARNINGS PER SHARE COMPUTATION

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                   THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,    SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,
                                   --------------------------     -------------------------
                                                    1995                           1995
                                       1996      (PRO FORMA)          1996      (PRO FORMA)
                                   --------------------------     -------------------------
<S>                                 <C>          <C>               <C>          <C>
Income Before Income Taxes ......   $1,735,614   $1,688,610        $2,484,924   $2,598,887
Plus Interest Expense ...........           --       79,592              --        120,958
                                    ----------   ----------        ----------   ----------
Income Before Income Taxes ......    1,735,614    1,768,202(1)      2,484,924    2,719,845(1)
Income Tax Provision ............      553,868      617,102(1)        740,383      949,226(1)
                                    ----------   ----------        ----------   ----------
Net Income for EPS Calculation ..   $1,181,746   $1,151,100        $1,744,541   $1,770,619
                                    ==========   ==========        ==========   ==========

Weighted average common shares
outstanding .....................    8,200,000    6,200,000         8,200,000    6,200,000
Pro Forma shares issued to
 retire debt and repay
 stockholder notes ..............           --      585,938(2)             --      560,156(2)
                                    ----------   ----------        ----------   ----------

Shares Outstanding ..............    8,200,000    6,785,938         8,200,000    6,760,156
                                    ==========   ==========        ==========   ==========

Earnings per Share ..............   $     0.14   $     0.17        $     0.21   $     0.26
                                    ==========   ==========        ==========   ==========
</TABLE>

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

(1) Pro forma net income represents the Company's reported income before income
    taxes, plus interest expense, less a pro forma income tax provision that
    would have been applicable had the Company been taxed as a C corporation.
    The Company had elected to be treated as an S corporation from January 1,
    1993 until prior to the closing date of the Offering and, as a result, was
    not subject to federal and certain state income taxes.

(2) Pro forma shares issued to retire debt and repay stockholder notes
    represents the number of shares of Common Stock which would be required to
    be sold to repay the $6.0 million notes issued by the Company to its
    stockholders in payment of a dividend representing the distribution of
    retained S corporation earnings and retire outstanding debt.

                                       13
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM RAYTEL
MEDICAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           5,783
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   26,225<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                34,055
<PP&E>                                          24,886
<DEPRECIATION>                                (15,696)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  71,969
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,046
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             8
<OTHER-SE>                                      55,488
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    71,969
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                60,846
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   50,869
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (2,575)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0<F2>
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 358
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,194
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,878
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,316
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,316
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .82
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .82
<FN>
<F1>(RECEIVABLES) REPRESENTS NET RECEIVABLES.
<F2>(LOSS PROVISION) INCLUDED IN (TOTAL COSTS)
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
# C_2021459EN.01004201.xml

| 12.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 459/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 459/42

---

FUEL CELLS AND HYDROGEN 2 JOINT UNDERTAKING

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2020

(2021/C 459/42)

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

https://www.fch.europa.eu/sites/default/files/FCH2%20JU%20-%202020%20Final%20Annual%20Accounts.docx.pdf.pdf

---
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATIONS



Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, in his capacity as an officer of SPACEHAB, Incorporated (SPACEHAB), that, to the
best of her knowledge, the Quarterly Report of SPACEHAB on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2003, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in
the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of SPACEHAB.



Date: May 12, 2004



/s/    BRIAN K. HARRINGTONBrian K. Harrington Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SPACEHAB, INC. and will be retained by SPACEHAB, INC. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

JOHNNY COVINGTON

VERSUS
CLARK SAND CO., INC.; CLEMCO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION F / K/ A CLEMCO SERVICES CORP.; DEPENDABLE ABRASIVES, INC.; E.D. BULLARD COMPANY; EMPIRE ABRASIVE EQUIPMENT COMPANY, L.P.; LEHIGH HANSON, INC. ( A SUBSIDIARY OF HEIDELBERG CEMENT GROUP) F/K/ A HANSON AGGREGATES, INC. F/K/ A HANSON AGGREGATES CENTRAL, INC. F /

K/ A PIONEER SOUTH CENTRAL, INC. F / K/ A PIONEER CONCRETE OF TEXAS, INC.; INGERSOLL-RAND CORPORATION; LEROI COMPRESSOR A/K/ A ROTARY TECHNOLOGIES; COMPRESSION 3M COMPANY; RUEMELIN MANUFACTURING CO., INC.; SANSTORM, INC.; BOB SCHMIDT MANUFACTURING, INC.; SOUTHERN SILICA OF LOUISIANA, INC.; SPECIALTY SAND COMPANY; SULLAIR COMPRESSOR CORPORATION; AND TXI OPERATIONS, L.P. NO. 2023 CW 0973



### DECEMBER 4, 2023

In Re: Empire Abrasive Equipment Company, L.P., applying for

supervisory writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 649436.

BEFORE: McCLENDON, HESTER, AND MILLER, JJ.

WRIT DENIED.

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT 

# A.s..D

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT FO,R THE COURT PMc CHH SMM
Unassociated Document




EXHIBIT 10.1(a)







FIRST AMENDMENT TO REAL ESTATE LEASE







THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this 8th day of March, 1999, by and between TIPPMANN PROPERTIES, INC., agent for JOHN V. TIPPMANN, SR., (hereinafter referred to as “Lessor”), and TOWER FINANCIAL CORPORATION (hereinafter referred to as “Lessee”), and WITNESSETH:







WHEREAS, the parties hereto entered into a Real Estate Lease dated January 1, 1999, currently covering approximately 13,891 usable square feet of premises commonly known as 116 East Berry Street, Suite 100, Fort Wayne, Indiana;







AND WHEREAS, Lessee and Lessor are desirous of leasing approximately two hundred (200) square feet of additional office space.







NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto agree as follows:








	
  

	
1.

	
The Leased Premises shall be increased to reflect approximately two hundred (200) square feet of additional office space as depicted on the attached Exhibit “A”.













	
  

	
2.

	
The term of the approximately two hundred (200) square feet of additional office space shall be month to month.













	
  

	
3.

	
Beginning March 1, 1999, the annual rent shall be increased to One Hundred Thirty-seven Thousand Three Hundred Eighty-seven and 25/100th Dollars ($137,387.25) and shall be paid in advance, without offset or reduction for any reason whatsoever, in monthly installments of Eleven Thousand Four Hundred Forty-eight and 94/100th Dollars ($11,448.94).













	
  

	
4.

	
Except as hereby amended, all other terms and conditions contained in the original Real Estate Lease are hereby reaffirmed and left unchanged by the terms of this First Amendment.












IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this First Amendment on the day and year first above written.








	
TIPPMANN PROPERTIES INC., Agent

	  	
TOWER FINANCIAL CORPORATION


	
for John V. Tippmann, Sr.   (“Lessor”)

	  	
(“Lessee”)


	  	  	  	  	  
	
BY:

	
/s/ Charles E. Tippmann

	  	
BY:

	
/s/ Kevin J. Himmelhaver


	  	  	  	  	  
	
PRINTED:

	
Charles E. Tippmann

	  	
PRINTED:

	
Kevin J. Himmelhaver
(December 31, 1986)

#### Meyer Ackerman et al., Respondents, v Michael Landes et al., Appellants.

— In an action, *inter alia,*seeking specific performance of an oral joint-venture agreement, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Gurahian, J.), entered January 15, 1986, which denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 3108 for the issuance of a commission to a notary public in order to depose an out-of-State nonparty witness.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

While the CPLR authorizes liberal pretrial disclosure *(Allen v Crowell-Collier Pub. Co.,*21 NY2d 403), this court has recently emphasized that supervision of disclosure is generally a matter within the sound discretion of the court and that unlimited disclosure is not permitted *(see, Conway v Bayley Seton Hosp.,*104 AD2d 1018).

At Special Term, the defendants’ contention was that they were entitled to a second deposition of a witness, despite the fact that more than two years had elapsed since the initial deposition and the plaintiffs had moved for leave to file a note of issue. The deposition transcript reveals that although the defendants’ then counsel was not present at the commencement of the initial deposition, he was not hindered in his questioning and all of his questions were answered by the witness. The defendants’ counsel failed to object to the fact that the deposition had commenced in his absence, and he did not make any effort to keep the deposition open pending his review of the transcript. Since the defendants’ counsel raised no objections at the taking of the deposition, the defendants’ contentions on this appeal must be deemed waived under CPLR 3115 (b). The mere fact that the defendants hired a different law firm two years later fails to justify reopening the deposition *(see, Mitchell v Wimet,*83 AD2d 658). Rubin, J. P., Lawrence, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.
#### GRAVES et al., Appellants, v. BRADLEY, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

April, 1896.)

Action by Maurice A. Graves and another, as executors, etc., against Christopher C. Bradley.

No opinion. So much of the order of the special term as denies the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend their complaint is reversed, and the order is modified so as to allow the amendment asked for, on condition that, within 20 days from the entry of this order and service of a copy thereof, the plaintiffs serve their amended complaint, and stipulate that the trial of the action proceed before the referee, heretofore appointed, upon the evidence already taken, and such additional proofs as may be offered by either party, and at the same time pay to the defendant’s attorney a trial fee of $30; and on the further condition that the defendant be permitted to answer such amended complaint within 20 days after its service, as aforesaid. And, as so modified, the order is affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements to the respondent. In case of the noncompliance with the above conditions, or any of them, the order appealed from is affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements to the respondent.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21016-21017]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9740]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

    Notice is hereby given that on April 7, 2000, a proposed Consent 
Decree in United States v. Fleetwood Industries, Inc., et al. Civil 
Action No. 00-CV-1818, was lodged with the United States District Court 
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
    In this action the United States sought the reimbursement of 
response costs in connection with the Berks Landfill Superfund Site in 
Spring Township, Pennsylvania (``the Site'') pursuant to

[[Page 21017]]

the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability 
Act (``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. The Consent Decree resolves 
the United States' claims against Fleetwood Industries, Inc., Herre 
Brothers, Inc., Heyco Metals, Inc., Kief Industries, Inc., Charles 
Koenig Wheel Alignment Service and Garage, and Brian R. Schlappich, 
Inc. for response costs incurred as a result of the release or 
threatened release of hazardous substances at the Site. These parties 
will pay the United States $82,297.77.
    The Department of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication comments relating to the Consent 
Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General 
of the Environment and Natural Resources Division, Department of 
Justice, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044, and should refer to 
United States v. Fleetwood Industries, Inc., et al., D.J. Ref. 90-11-2-
1347.
    The Consent Decree may be examined at the Office of the United 
States Attorney, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 615 Chestnut Street, 
Suite 1250, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106, or at the Region 3 Office 
of the Environmental Protection Agency, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania 19103. A copy of the Consent Decree may also be obtained 
by mail by requesting a copy from the Department of Justice Consent 
Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044. In requesting a 
copy, please enclose a check in the amount of $8.75 (35 pages at 25 
cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the Consent Decree 
Library.

Joel M. Gross,
Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural 
Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 00-9740 Filed 4-18-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
#### Donald J. Fending et al., Appellants, v Carborundum Company, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent-Appellant. Fowler Electric, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.

— Judgment, insofar as it awards damages to plaintiff Donald J. Fending, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and a new trial granted on the issue of damages only, unless defendant shall, within 20 days after service of a copy of the order herein with notice of entry thereof stipulate to increase the verdict to the principal sum of $100,000, in which event the judgment shall be modified accordingly and, as modified, affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: In our view, the jury verdict of $35,000 in favor of plaintiff Donald J. Fending deviates so much from what would be considered fair compensation for his injuries as to shock our conscience *(see, Beardsley v Wyoming County Community Hosp.,*79 AD2d 1110). In addition to his uncontroverted special damage claim of $5,000 for medical expenses, the proof demonstrates that *984plaintiff lost wages in the amount of $18,000 for the period from September 28, 1978 to June 13, 1979 and $2,500 for a second hospitalization period in 1982. Thus, it would appear that only $9,500 of the verdict may be allotted to plaintiff’s pain and suffering and future medical expenses. Defendants question plaintiff’s credibility concerning the pain he has suffered since the accident and claim that he did not establish that work would have been available to him during the time of his disability, that the second hospitalization was connected with his injury, or that there is reasonable certainty he will need future surgery. The uncontroverted medical testimony, however, is that plaintiff’s injury is permanent, painful, long term and degenerative. Based on the record, we find that the jury verdict for plaintiff Donald J. Fending was inadequate and should be raised to $100,000. (Appeals from judgment of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Ricotta, J. — tort—fall from scaffold.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Denman and Schnepp, JJ.