alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2011295EN.01000301.xml

| 7.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 295/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 295/3

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions given at its meeting of 3 December 2010 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/39.309 (2) — LCD

Rapporteur: Denmark

2011/C 295/03

| 1. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amount of the fines. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amount of the fines.

| 2. | The Advisory Committee agrees the Commission on the increase of the basic amount to ensure a sufficient deterrent effect. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees the Commission on the increase of the basic amount to ensure a sufficient deterrent effect.

| 3. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the reductions of the fines based on the 2002 Leniency Notice. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the reductions of the fines based on the 2002 Leniency Notice.

| 4. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment of the inability to pay requests. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment of the inability to pay requests.

| 5. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines. |
| --- | --- |

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines.

| 6. | The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

6.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union.

---
# C_2011306EN.01000501.xml

| 18.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 306/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 306/5

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

2011/C 306/04

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 5.9.2011 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 5.9.2011-31.12.2011 |
| Member State | Portugal |
| Stock or Group of stocks | ALF/3X14- |
| Species | Alfonsinos (Beryx spp.) |
| Zone | EU and international waters of III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XII and XIV |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | — |

Date and time of closure

5.9.2011

Duration

5.9.2011-31.12.2011

Member State

Portugal

Stock or Group of stocks

ALF/3X14-

Species

Alfonsinos (Beryx spp.)

Beryx

Zone

EU and international waters of III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XII and XIV

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

—

Web link to the decision of the Member State:

http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/fishing_rules/tacs/index_en.htm

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
¿Las rejas de protección están generando peligros?

Cada año, más de 400 mineros pierden un promedio de 45 días de

trabajo debido al mal diseño de las rejas de protección para las 

máquinas. ¡Más de 18 000 días de trabajo perdidos por año!* 

* Los datos se basan en un análisis que investigadores de NIOSH realizaron de todas las lesiones 

notificadas a la Administración de Seguridad y Salud en Minas (MSHA) entre el 2004 y el 2012, en las 

que se identificaron las cubiertas y las rejas de protección de metal como fuentes de las lesiones.

18 000 

días perdidos

¡Haga que el diseño de las rejas de protección excluya los peligros!

Pinte las rejas de protección de un solo 

color brillante que contraste con el 

área a su alrededor, a fin de que 

sea más fácil verlas.

Añada manijas o agarraderas para 

que sea más seguro tomarlas.

Diseñe las rejas de 

protección de manera que no 

sea necesario retirarlas para hacer 

inspecciones. 

Diseñe las rejas de protección en 

forma de secciones pequeñas y 

livianas para que una sola persona 

pueda retirarlas fácilmente. Las ilustraciones son de NIOSH

Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention

National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health

Octubre del 2020

MLS - 323763

Descargo de responsabilidad: La mención de cualquier empresa o producto no constituye respaldo alguno del 

Instituto Nacional para la Seguridad y Salud Ocupacional de los Centros para el Control y la Prevención de Enfermedades.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-2226

In Re: KELVIN ANDRE SPOTTS, a/k/a Shorty,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. 

(3:98-cr-00047-1)

Submitted: January 27, 2014 Decided: January 31, 2014

Before GREGORY, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kelvin Andre Spotts, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Kelvin Andre Spotts petitions for a writ of mandamus, 

seeking an order from this court directing the district court to 

act on his motions for reconsideration of the district court’s 

order denying his motion to reopen his initial 28 U.S.C. § 2255 

(2012) proceedings in light of United States v. Fisher, 711 F.3d 

460 (4th Cir. 2013). Our review of the district court’s docket

reveals that the district court has denied the motions for 

reconsideration. Accordingly, because the district court has 

recently acted on Spotts’ motions, we deny the mandamus petition 

as moot. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Spotts’ 

motion to remove stay of mandate and amendment to petition for 

rehearing and/or rehearing en banc is denied. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process. 

PETITION DENIED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                              52
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,240
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (445)
<INVENTORY>                                      2,674
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,770
<PP&E>                                           6,563
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (6,010)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,982
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,637
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           413
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,570)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,982
<SALES>                                          1,746
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,992
<CGS>                                              767
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,822
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 109
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (17)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (17)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (17)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.00)
        

</TABLE>
#### STATE v. DUNCAN

No. 180 PC.

Case below: 51 N.C. App. 710.

Petition by defendants for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 8 July 1981.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000060150
<NAME> W. JOSEPH DRYER
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> 0

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   0.00
<CASH>                                           4,148
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       90
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,295
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,400
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              157
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           600
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,957
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,400
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   194
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   189
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      5
<INCOME-TAX>                                         2
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  3
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         3
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00


</TABLE>
CERTIFICATION
OF
 CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
 CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER
 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 accompanying comprehensive Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of
Planet411.com Inc. for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2003 and June 30, 2004,
I, Victor Cantore, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge,
that:
  (1)
    the
      Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Planet411.com Inc. for the years ended
      June 30, 2003 and June 30, 2004 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 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the years
      ended June 30, 2003 and June 30, 2004, fairly presents in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      Planet411.com Inc. 
 
  By:                 
/s/Victor
Cantore
 Name: Victor
Cantore
  Title: Chief
Executive Officer
 Chief
Financial Officer
  Date: March 8,
2005
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

GAINESVILLE DIVISION 

CASE NO. 1:10-CV-90-SPM-GRJ 

SHANE SWIFT, on Behalf of Himself and 

All Others Similarly Situated, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

BANCORPSOUTH BANK, 

 Defendant. 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND REQUEST FOR ELECTONIC SERVICE 

 Please take notice that Darren T. Kaplan, Esq. of the law firm of Chitwood Harley Harnes 

LLP 1230 Peachtree Street, 2300 Promenade II, Atlanta, Georgia 30309 enters his appearance in 

the above-entitled action on behalf of Plaintiff Shane Swift and the Certified Class and requests 

that the Court send him CM/ECF notices via electronic means at the following e-mail 

address(es): 

Darren T. Kaplan dkaplan@chitwoodlaw.com; lsmith@chitwoodlaw.com

Dated: September 8, 2014 

Respectfully Submitted, 

/s/ Darren T. Kaplan 

Darren T. Kaplan 

Georgia Bar No.: 172670 

dkaplan@chitwoodlaw.com 

CHITWOOD HARLEY HARNES, LLP 

2300 Promenade II 

1230 Peachtree Street, N.E. 

Atlanta, GA 30309 

Telephone: (404) 873-3900 

Facsimile: (404) 876-4476 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on September 8, 2014, I electronically filed the foregoing document 

with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being 

served this day on all counsel of record or pro se parties in the manner specified, either via 

transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized 

manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of 

Electronic Filing.

/s/ Darren T. Kaplan 

Darren T. Kaplan 

Georgia Bar No.: 172670
NO. 07-09-0003-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL B

	JUNE 29, 2009

	______________________________

	TERRY SMITH, APPELLANT

	V.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 46TH DISTRICT COURT OF WILBARGER COUNTY;

	NO. 11,085; HONORABLE DAN MIKE BIRD, JUDGE

	_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

	ON MOTION TO DISMISS

	Appellant, Terry Smith, filed Notice of Appeal to appeal a judgment of conviction for the offense of theft of property valued at $200,000 or more and resulting 10 year sentence entered against him in the 46th District Court of Wilbarger County, Texas.  However, appellant has now filed a motion to dismiss the appeal.

	Because the motion meets the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) and this Court has not delivered its decision prior to receiving it, the motion is hereby granted and the appeal is dismissed.  Having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will issue.

						Mackey K. Hancock

						           Justice

Do not publish.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                                WASHINGTON, D.C.

                                   FORM 10-Q
                                QUARTERLY REPORT

Under Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

                             FOR NINE MONTHS ENDED

                               September 30, 1996

                            Commission File:  0-1999

                            KENTUCKY INVESTORS, INC.
               (Exact name of registrant as specified in Charter)

                                    KENTUCKY
         (State of Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)

                                   61-6030333
                      (IRS Employer Identification Number

                       200 Capital Avenue, P. O. Box 717
                           Frankfort, Kentucky  40602
                    (Address of Principal Executive Offices)

                 Registrant's Telephone Number - (502) 223-2361

          Securities registered pursuant to Section 13(g) of the Act:

                 Common Capital Stock par value $1.00 per share
                               (Title of Class)

        Number of outstanding shares as of September 30, 1996 - 815,591

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to
such filing requirements for the past 90 days Yes X    No

             

                          PART II - OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 1.  Legal Proceedings.

There are no legal proceedings to which the Registrant is a party.

ITEM 2.  Changes in Securities.

Not Applicable.

ITEM 3.  Defaults Upon Senior Securities.

Not Applicable.

ITEM 4.  Submission of matters to a Vote of Security Holders.

None.

ITEM  5.  Other Information.

Not Applicable.

ITEM 6.  Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K.

(b)  There were no reports filed on Form 8-K during the quarter ended 9/30/96.

(c)  Exhibit 27 - Financial Data Schedule.

                                   SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

KENTUCKY INVESTORS, INC.

/S/
BY:  HARRY LEE WATERFIELD II
PRESIDENT
DATE:  NOVEMBER 8, 1996

/S/
BY:  JIMMY R. MCIVER
TREASURER
DATE:  NOVEMBER 8, 1996
FILED IN 12th COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 4/24/2015 11:15:26 AM CATHY S. LUSK Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     3,476,370
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,476,370
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                23,650
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (23,650)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (23,650)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 11


THE LAMSON & SESSIONS CO. AND SUBSIDIARIES

EXHIBIT (11) - COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                               SECOND QUARTER ENDED         FIRST HALF ENDED
                                             -------------------------   -------------------------
PRIMARY                                         1997          1996          1997          1996
                                             -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------
<S>                                           <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>       
   Average common shares outstanding          13,310,351    13,295,417    13,308,218    13,293,584
   Average common share equivalents:
        Stock options and warrants - based
        on treasury stock method using
        average market price                     230,205       486,199       234,869       401,556
                                             -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------
TOTALS                                        13,540,556    13,781,616    13,543,087    13,695,140

FULLY DILUTED
   Average common shares outstanding          13,310,351    13,295,417    13,308,218    13,293,584
   Average common share equivalents:
        Stock options and warrants - based
        on treasury stock method                 273,973       516,838       256,753       427,784
                                             -----------   -----------   -----------   -----------
TOTALS                                        13,584,324    13,812,255    13,564,971    13,721,368


NET INCOME                                   $ 1,975,000   $ 3,603,000   $ 4,132,000   $ 5,615,000
                                             ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========
Earnings per common share and common
share equivalents:

   Primary Net Earnings Per Share            $      0.15   $      0.26   $      0.31   $      0.41
                                             ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========
   Fully Diluted Net Earnings Per Share      $      0.15   $      0.26   $      0.30   $      0.41
                                             ===========   ===========   ===========   ===========
</TABLE>




                                      -10-
* 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-30175 Conference Calendar

JEAN ALLEN ROUX, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus BURL CAIN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, Respondent-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 97-CV-618

- - - - - - - - - - August 18, 1998 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Jean Allen Roux, #109227, requests that this court grant him a certificate of appealability (COA) from the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. Because Roux filed his § 2254 petition in March 1997, the COA requirement of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act applies to his case. Green v. Johnson , 116 F.3d 1115, 1119-20 (5th Cir. 1997). A COA may beNo. 98-30175 -2- issued only if the prisoner has made a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." § 2253(c)(2). This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, on its own motion, if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby , 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). A timely notice of appeal is a prerequisite for the exercise of jurisdiction by this court. United States v.
Carr , 979 F.2d 51, 55 (5th Cir. 1992). Rule 4(a)(1), F ED . R. A PP . P., requires that the notice of appeal in a civil action be filed within 30 days of entry of the judgment or order from which appeal is taken. A prisoner's pro se notice of appeal is deemed filed when delivered to the prison authorities for mailing to the court clerk. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988). "Timely filing may be shown by a notarized statement or by a declaration [under penalty of perjury] setting forth the date of deposit and stating that first-class postage has been prepaid." Fed. R. App. P. 4(c). Roux’s notice of appeal contained no notarized statement or declaration under penalty of perjury setting forth the date it was submitted for mailing and that first-class postage had been prepaid as required by Fed. R. App. P. 4(c). Because it cannot be determined from the record when Roux delivered the notice of appeal to prison authorities, the case is REMANDED to the district court to make such a determination. See Thompson v. Montgomery , 853 F.2d 287, 288 (5th Cir. 1988). The court should make the determinationNo. 98-30175 -3- promptly and return the case to this court for dismissal or further processing, as may be appropriate.
REMANDED.