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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF TEL-COM WIRELESS CABLE TV FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           6,370
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   87,221
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               133,257
<PP&E>                                       1,927,380
<DEPRECIATION>                                 507,014
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,811,676
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,169,300
<BONDS>                                      2,366,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,010
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,316,792
<SALES>                                        341,715
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               341,715
<CGS>                                           48,281
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   48,281
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               627,314
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,184
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (350,064)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (350,064)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.09)
        

</TABLE>
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3172 

To provide conditions for funds made available for certain projects located 

in the State of Louisiana, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 19, 2008 

Mr. VITTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To provide conditions for funds made available for certain 

projects located in the State of Louisiana, 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, 

3 SECTION 1. CONDITIONS RELATING TO FUNDS MADE 

4 AVAILABLE FOR CERTAIN LOUISIANA 

5 PROJECTS. 

6 With respect to funds made available for the Lake 

7 Pontchartrain and Vicinity project, the West Bank and 

8 Vicinity project, and elements of the Southeast Louisiana 

9 Urban Drainage project that are located within the geo10 graphic perimeter of the West Bank and Vicinity and 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•S 3172 IS

1 Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity projects to reach the 

2 Corps of Engineers designated 100-year level of protec3 tion— 

4 (1) the non-Federal cost allocations for the 

5 projects shall be consistent with the cost-sharing 

6 provisions under which the projects were originally 

7 constructed; 

8 (2) the non-Federal share for the projects shall 

9 be repaid— 

10 (A) in accordance with section 103(k) of 

11 the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 

12 (33 U.S.C. 2213(k)); and 

13 (B) within the 30-year period beginning on 

14 the date on which the funds are made available; 

15 and 

16 (3) the expenditure of the funds may be made 

17 without regard to individual amounts or purposes, 

18 except that any reallocation of funds that are nec19 essary to accomplish the established goals are au20 thorized, subject to the approval of— 

21 (A) the Committee on Appropriations of 

22 the Senate; and 

23 (B) the Committee on Appropriations of 

24 the House of Representatives. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
OLDE POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASS'N, INC. v. OLDE POINT ASSOCIATES LTD. PARTNERSHIP.

No. COA06-1639.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed July 17, 2007.

Certification Date August 6, 2007.

Appeal from Pender (06CVS525).

Case reported without published opinion. Dismissed.
<PAGE>


                                                                 EXHIBIT 32(a)


  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, Jeffry N. Quinn, Chief Executive Officer of Solutia Inc. (the "Company"),
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

         (1)      the Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the
                  Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (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.

Dated: March 28, 2007

                                         /s/ Jeffry N. Quinn
                                         -------------------
                                         Jeffry N. Quinn
                                         Chief Executive Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Solutia Inc. and will
be retained by Solutia Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
##### 



Exhibit 99.1
Certification of CEO and CFO
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Ainsworth Lumber Co. Ltd. (the
Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Brian
Ainsworth, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Jim Logan, as Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the
best of his knowledge, that:

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

(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



By: /s/ Brian Ainsworth
Brian Ainsworth
Chief Executive Officer
May 16, 2003




By: /s/ JAMES LOGAN
James Logan
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


This certification accompanies the
Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
EXHIBIT 10.1


                                                                    CONFIDENTIAL


                        MARKETING AND LICENSE AGREEMENT
                                 FIRST AMENDMENT

     This  first  amendment  to the  Agreement  is entered  into by and  between
GENERAL  PLASTIC  INDUSTRIAL  CO., LTD.  (hereinafter  referred to as "GPI") and
Color Imaging, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "CI") (together both hereinafter
referred to as  "parties")  and  becomes  effective  July 31, 2005  (hereinafter
referred to as the "First Amendment").

         WHEREAS,  CI is no longer marketing or selling the Licensed Products to
national retail stores or the office superstores  (hereinafter  "Chain Stores"),
and GPI wishes to pursue these and other Licensed  Products  marketing and sales
opportunities directly or through others; and

         WHEREAS,   GPI  and  CI  wish  to  continue  the  license  and  royalty
arrangement for the Licensed Products.

         NOW,  THEREFORE,  for and in  consideration of the premises and promise
contained  herein and other good and  valuable  consideration,  the  receipt and
sufficiency  of which are hereby  acknowledged,  the parties do hereby  agree to
amendment the Agreement as follows:

     1. Article I paragraphs  1.1 and 1.2 are hereby  deleted and replaced  with
the following:

     1.1 Grant of License.  GPI hereby grants to CI a  non-exclusive  license to
sell Licensed Products,  offer to sell Licensed Products,  and import and export
Licensed Products for use or sale in the Field, free from suit by GPI for patent
infringement worldwide. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement or otherwise,
CI agrees that GPI retains any and all of GPI's intellectual  property rights in
the Licensed Products.

     1.2  Limitation.  The  grant  of the  license  by  GPI  to CI is  expressly
conditioned  upon CI's  cessation of directly  marketing or selling the Licensed
Products to Chain Stores.

Article II paragraph 2.1 is hereby deleted and replaced with the following:

     2.1 Marketing Expenses.  Unless otherwise provided for in the Agreement, as
amended,  GPI and CI shall each be responsible  for their own Licensed  Products
promotional expenses.

         IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  parties  hereto  have  each  caused  a duly
authorized  officer to sign this  Agreement  to be  effective as of the July 31,
2005.

CI:                                     GPI:

Color Imaging, Inc.                     General Plastics Industrial Co., Ltd.


   /S/ SUELING WANG                        /S/ JUI-CHI WANG
By:                                     By:___________________________________
   ------------------------------
Name: Sueling Wang, Ph. D.              Name:  Jui-Chi Wang
Title:President                         Title: President

      07/20/05                                 07/20/05
Date:                                   Date: ________________________________
     ----------------------------

[CI SEAL]                              [CORPORATE SEAL]
**Exhibit11**

 

**PAULAFINANCIAL AND SUBSIDIARIES**

**Computationof Basic and Diluted Earnings Per Share**

(In thousands, except per share data)

 
|                                                                                |   | **Six Months  Ended  June 30,** |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                                                |   | **2004**                             |   | **2003** |   |
|                                                                                |   |                                 |   |   |   |
| Net income                                                                          |   | $                                    | 773    |   | $ | 409 |   |
|                                                                                |   |                                 |   |   |   |
| Weighted average shares outstanding for  calculating  basic earnings per share |   | 6,441,198                            |   | 6,206,398 |   |
|                                                                                |   |                                 |   |   |   |
| Options                                                                             |   | 315,194                              |   | 212,544 |   |
|                                                                                |   |                                 |   |   |   |
| Total shares for calculating diluted  earnings  per share                      |   | 6,756,392                            |   | 6,418,942 |   |
|                                                                                |   |                                 |   |   |   |
| Basic earnings per share                                                            |   | $                                    | 0.12   |   | $ | 0.07 |   |
|                                                                                |   |                                 |   |   |   |
| Diluted earnings per share                                                          |   | $                                    | 0.11   |   | $ | 0.06 |   |

 

----
In the Matter of J.S.B., D.K.B., D.D.J., Z.A.T.J., Minor Children. appealed by Respondent Mother.

No. 269P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 11, 2007.

K. Edward Greene, Tobias S. Hampson, Raleigh, for Mother.

Twyla George, Gastonia, Tyrone C. Wade, Charlotte, for Mecklenburg County DSS.

Jeannie Brown, Pili Fleming, Charlotte, for Guardian ad Litem.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 644 S.E.2d 580.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Respondent (Mother) on the 7th day of June 2007 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of October 2007."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 19th day of June 2007 by Respondent (Mother) in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of October 2007."
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 458/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 458/2013 of 16 May 2013 correcting Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 laying down detailed            rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards marketing standards for eggs         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 458/2013                     

# of 16 May 2013

# correcting Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as                        regards marketing standards for eggs                     

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1) and in particular Article 121(d) in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Commission Regulation (EC) No 589/2008(2) lays down detailed rules for implementing Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards marketing standards for eggs. The wording                              of the definition of ‘batch’ in Article 1 of that Regulation should be clarified so that it does not give rise to diverging                              interpretations and thereby to different practices in the Member States.

(2)Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 should therefore be corrected accordingly.

(3)The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common                              Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

In the second subparagraph of Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 point (i) is replaced by the following:

“batch” means the eggs in packs or loose from one and the same production site or packing centre, situated in one place, with                                 one and the same laying date or date of minimum durability or packing date, the same farming method and, in case of graded                                 eggs, the same quality and weight grading;’.                           

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 16 May 2013.

*For the Commission*                            

*The President*                            

José Manuel Barroso                            

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 163, 24.6.2008, p. 6.
STATE v. Timothy RICHARDSON.

No. 232A95-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 27, 2007.

Howard A. Kurtz, Raleigh, for Richardson.

Jonathan Babb, Special Deputy Attorney General, Howard S. Boney, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th day of December 2006 by Defendant to Reverse Death Sentence and Convert to a Life Sentence:

> "Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 27th day of June 2007."
Order entered July 9, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-00328-CV

ELDA TELLE, Appellant

V.

CAPITAL TITLE OF TEXAS, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 471st Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 471-01185-2021

ORDER

Before the Court is appellee’s July 8, 2021 unopposed motion for an 

extension of time to file its brief on the merits. We GRANT the motion and 

extend the time to July 19, 2021.

/s/ CRAIG SMITH

JUSTICE
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1
 
                                  THE COMPANY
 
                       RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                            (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                         
                                                                          YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                                              --------------------------------------------
                                                                 1996              1997            1998    
                                                              ----------        ----------      ----------  
<S>                                                           <C>               <C>             <C>
Pre-tax loss from continuing operations.....................   $(48,488)         $(74,757)       $(48,866)
                                                               --------          --------        --------
Fixed charges:
  Interest expense and amortization of debt discount and
     premium on all indebtedness............................     37,742            78,185          78,107
Rentals:
  Rent expense(1)...........................................        719             1,521           1,525
  Preferred dividend requirement............................        496               882             945
                                                               --------          --------        --------
          Total fixed charges...............................     38,957            80,588          80,577
                                                               --------          --------        --------
Earnings before income taxes and fixed charges..............   $ (9,531)         $  5,831        $ 31,711
                                                               ========          ========        ========
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges(2).......................         --                --              --
                                                               ========          ========        ========
</TABLE>
 
---------------
 
(1) For leases where the interest factor can be specifically identified, the
    actual interest factor was used. For all other leases, the interest factor
    is estimated at one-third of total rent expense for the applicable period
    which management believes represents a reasonable approximation of the
    interest factor.

(2) The Company's earnings for the years ended December 31, 1996, 1997 and 1998
    were inadequate to cover fixed charges by $48,488, $74,757 and $48,866,
    respectively.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED January 9, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-41125 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee

v. ROLANDO RAMOS Defendant - Appellant

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:04-CR-2114-1

-------------------- Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Rolando Ramos was convicted by a jury of two counts of transporting undocumented aliens within the United States for financial gain by means of a motor vehicle, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324, and was sentenced to 37 months in prison. Ramos appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress, arguing that the arresting agent did not have probable cause or a warrant to arrest him. We review the district court’s factual findings for clear error and the district court’s ultimate conclusion as to theNo. 05-41125 -2- constitutionality of the law enforcement action de novo. United States v. Runyan , 275 F.3d 449, 456 (5th Cir. 2001). We consider all of the the evidence taken at trial, not just that presented before the ruling on the suppression motion, in the light most favorable to the Government. See id. ; United States v. Rideau , 969 F.2d 1572, 1576 (5th Cir. 1992) (en banc). “The Constitution does not require that a warrant issue prior to an arrest based on probable cause, even if no exigent circumstances prevented the obtainment of a warrant.” United States v. Avila-Dominguez , 610 F.2d 1266, 1270-71 (5th Cir. 1980). The question is whether the United States Border Patrol agents had probable cause at the time Ramos was arrested. See id. at 1271. Under the collective knowledge doctrine, we look to whether the ‘laminated total’ of the information known by the agents who were in communication with one another amounted to probable cause. See United States v. Kye Soo Lee , 962 F.2d 430, 435-36 (5th Cir. 1992). The testimony at trial shows that the facts and circumstances within the collective knowledge of the Border Patrol agents at the time of the arrest were sufficient for a reasonable person to conclude that Ramos had committed the offense of illegally transporting aliens. See 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii); United States v. Wadley , 59 F.3d 510, 512 (5th Cir. 1995). Accordingly, the agents had probable cause forNo. 05-41125 -3- the warrantless arrest, and the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress.
AFFIRMED.