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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           2,484
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,484
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,724
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              350
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       511,500     
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,724
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.2




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 filing by Hong Kong Winalite Group, Inc. (the “Company”) of the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned, as the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:




(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.




Date: May 15,
2009









/s/ Jianquan Li
              Jianquan
      Li
              (Principal
      Financial Officer)
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13** 

**- 1428** 

In re: CHARLES ELLIS

,

Petitioner

.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus
(No. 6:06

- cr

- 00037

- 1)

Submitted : July 10, 2013 Decided: August 1, 2013

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.

Charles Ellis, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Charles Ellis petitions for a writ of mandamus,

alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on

his motion to amend his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2013)

motion and motion to reconsider its order denying his Fed. R.

Civ. P. 59(e) and 52(b) motions fo r reconsideration. He seeks

an order from this court directing the district court to act.

We find the present record does not reveal undue delay in the

district court. * Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma

pauperis and deny the mandamus petit ion. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before th is court and argument would

n ot aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

* We note that Ellis filed the pending motions on the same day that he noted appeals from related orders. We adjudicated these appeals and the mandate issued on May 8, 2013.
#### SINCLAIR REFINING COMPANY, INC., v. JOHN O. (JACK) SHUFORD and Wife, ELLEN HOLLAND SHUFORD.

(Filed *7*March, 1956.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Froneberger, J.,*September Term, 1955, of LINCOLN.

This is a civil action instituted by the plaintiff against the defendants for the recovery of damages to the property of the plaintiff, which property adjoined the property of the defendants, said damages being caused by the alleged negligence of the defendants, their agents and employees, by setting fire to trash and rubbish on the property of the defendants without properly guarding the same, which fire burned the property of the plaintiff.

At the close of plaintiff’s evidence, motion for judgment as of nonsuit was interposed on behalf of both defendants. The motion was overruled as to defendant John 0. (Jack) Shuford but allowed as to defendant Ellen Holland Shuford.

The jury answered the first issue as to negligence in favor of the defendant. From the judgment entered on the verdict the plaintiff appeals, assigning error.

*Childs & Childs for appellant.*

*M. T. Leatherman for appellee.*

PeR CüRiam.

A careful examination of the assignments of error brought forward by the appellant and argued in its brief, in our opinion, present no prejudicial error of sufficient merit to justify an order for a new trial.

No error.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE HOLT GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES AS OF
AND FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           3,217
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   96,363
<ALLOWANCES>                                    34,380
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                80,819
<PP&E>                                         351,128
<DEPRECIATION>                                 129,523
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 364,159
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          367,551
<BONDS>                                         51,250
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   364,159
<REVENUE-FROM-SERVICES>                        234,074
<RENTAL-INCOME>                                  7,855
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               241,929
<COST-OF-SERVICES>                             239,705
<EXPENSES-APPLICABLE-TO-RENTAL-ACTIVITY>        12,090
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  251,795
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,929
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              22,879
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (39,674)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (39,674)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (39,674)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (396.74)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (396.74)


</TABLE>
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 13, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-1943

AVS, Inc, Advanced Vacuum Systems:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that this particular product is available 

only from China.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
United States Bankruptcy Court

Northern District of California

In re: PG&E CORPORATION and Chapter 11

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY, Case No.: 19-30088 (DM)

Debtors Jointly Administered

TRANSFER OF CLAIM OTHER THAN FOR SECURITY

A CLAIM HAS BEEN FILED IN THIS CASE or deemed filed under 11 U.S.C. § 1111(a). Transferee

hereby gives notice pursuant to Rule 3001(e)(2), Fed. R. Bankr. P., of the transfer, other than for security,

of the claim referenced in this evidence and notice.

Sencha Funding, LLC Tulsa Inspection Resources – PUC, LLC

Name of Transferee Name of Transferor

Name and Address where notices to transferee Original Court Claim #: 31028

should be sent: Claim Amount: $10,410,562.51

Date Claim Filed: 10/11/2019

Sencha Funding, LLC

c/o Farallon Capital Management, L.L.C.

One Maritime Plaza, Suite 2100

San Francisco, CA 94111

Attn: Michael G. Linn

Tel: 1 415 421 2132

Email: mlinn@faralloncapital.com

Last Four Digits of Acct #: ______N/A______ Last Four Digits of Acct. #: ____N/A_____

Name and Address where transferee payments 

should be sent (if different from above)

I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided in this notice is true and correct to the best

of my knowledge and belief.

By:_/s/ Andrew A. Jones_______________ Date: December 2, 2019

Transferee/Transferee’s Agent

Penalty for making a false statement: Fine of up to $500,000 or imprisonment for up to 5 years, or both. 18 U.S.C. §§ 152 & 3571.

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4924 Filed: 12/02/19 Entered: 12/02/19 11:38:22 Page 1 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4924 Filed: 12/02/19 Entered: 12/02/19 11:38:22 Page 2 of

2
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 46 (Thursday, March 9, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 12946]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5805]



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


FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

Ocean Freight Forwarder License; Revocations

    Notice is hereby given that the following ocean freight forwarder 
licenses have been revoked by the Federal Maritime Commission pursuant 
to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. app. 1718) and the 
regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing of ocean 
freight forwarders, 46 CFR part 510.
Licensed Number: 2767
Name: Stiebel International Shipping, Inc.
Address: 116 Marlborough, Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302
Date Revoked: January 27, 1995
Reason: Failed to furnish a valid surety bond.

Licensed Number: 3632
Name: Transcontinental Marketing Corporation dba TRAMACO
Address: 7425 No. Mona Lisa Rd., Ste. 4, Tucson, AR 85741
Date Revoked: February 3, 1995
Reason: Failed to furnish a valid surety bond.

Licensed Number: 3641
Name: Kudley Trans-Port Service, Inc.
Address: 1714 Casery Blvd., Jacksonville, FL 32211
Date Revoked: February 4, 1995
Reason: Failed to furnish a valid surety bond.

Licensed Number: 3541
Name: C Port Miami Corporation
Address: 6960 N.W. 186th St., Ste 324, Miami, FL 33015
Date Revoked: February 11, 1995
Reason: Failed to furnish a valid surety bond.
Bryant L. VanBrakle,
Director, Bureau of Tariffs, Certification and Licensing.
[FR Doc. 95-5805 Filed 3-8-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
#### IN RE HOMESTEADS AND EXEMPTIONS

1869

RESOLUTION ASKING INFORMATION OF THE SUPREME COURT.

*Resolved,*by the General Assembly of North Carolina, That the Supreme Court be respectfully requested to advise the Legislature at its present session upon the following points of law:

1. Does Article Ten of the State Constitution, entitled “Homesteads and Exemptions,” exempt from sale under Court executions obtained on a contract complete before the adoption of the State Constitution, a realty or homestead of the value of one thousand dollars.

2. Is personal property of the value of five hundred dollars exempt from sale under execution of a like character.

Ratified the 21th day of January, A.D. 1869.

—Public Laws, 1868-69, p. 703.

The following communication was received from the Hon. R. M. Pearson, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, which was read and transmitted to the House of Representatives :

Raleigh, February 1st, 1869.

*To the*HoN. Ton R. Caldwell, *Lieutenant Governor, and*Joseph W. Holdek, *¡Speaker, &c.*

I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter with the accompanying resolutions of the General Assembly, requesting the Supreme Court to give its opinion in regard to the validity of the homestead exemption, against debts contracted prior to the ratification of the Constitution.

With every disposition to comply with any request of the honorable bodies over which you preside, the view which the Justices of the Court take of their constitutional duties forbids them from doing so in this instance.

*716Tbe functions of tbe Court are restricted to cases constituted before it. We are not at liberty to prejudice questions of law.

In tbe contested election between Waddell and Berry, tbe Judge of tbe Court, on tbe request of tbe Senate, after much hesitation, expressed an opinion in regard to tbe qualification of voters. That, however, is tbe only instance in which it was ever done, and it was put on tbe ground that tbe questions could not come before tbe Court in a judicial form. Tbe questions set out in tbe resolutions under consideration, not only may, but in all probability will, come before us for decision.

Respectfully yours, &c.,

R. M. PeaRsoN, *Chief Justice.*

—Feb. 1, 1869, *Sen. Journal,*219-220.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 47 (Friday, March 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 13141]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5889]



[[Page 13141]]

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Docket No. GT93-31-001]


Northwest Pipeline Corp.; Notice of Refund Report

March 6, 1995.
    Take notice that on March 1, 1995, Northwest Pipeline Corporation 
(Northwest), tendered for filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission (Commission) a refund report in the above referenced docket.
    Northwest states that the refund detailed in the instant filing was 
ordered by the Commission on November 26, 1993. The refund was paid on 
January 31, 1995 and is comprised of the remaining ten percent of 1992 
Gas Inventory Charge revenues plus accrued interest through January 31, 
1995.
    Northwest states that a copy of this filing has been served upon 
all affected customers and relevant state regulatory commissions.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol 
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 
of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. All such protests 
should be filed on or before March 13, 1995. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-5889 Filed 3-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
FifirtUflAyjJolS' 

## JECEIVEDIN i FEB 04 208 

### .UoKJ&fcfl^If. Lqux3£ f&qszjod dl&ek AtoMcoete,Gtei* J" ' '

—,—,—,—„—_ / "" "

. , i,_....,. -, • 

## fe:r/t.Ci.Klo.Q^Olo~D&flHA.(l\ Ld&rA^AU'M hsA^ (LU/ex, 

## Bsi^ n_ui£ &fP£c£> ; Mort Xt xd ~rU£££ (teim/ni>d ft^otta^ AJOir te> PL£fti£ 3a*R&w me xf A vect<5f2>ij qaj / uWc \t\n<> h^yjj /r)4JS<z, 

## HUfl/UU \^cu. fbl UojuM C^9^Sd6^77j2>A/s 

# dti&a^JE IP&fizafULLj;
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 11

                    WINDSOR REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST 8
                    --------------------------------------
                  COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER COMMON SHARE (1)
                  ----------------------------------------    
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
 
                                             For the Year Ended December 31
                                             -------------------------------
                                                    1996            1995
                                             ---------------    ------------
<S>                                          <C>                <C>
 
Net loss                                        $   (121,500)   $    (69,700)
 Less dividends paid:
  Preferred                                         (147,100)       (144,400)
  Common                                            (135,300)       (132,400)
  Unpaid Preferred                                                    (3,100)
                                             ---------------    ------------
Overdistributed Earnings                        $   (403,900)   $   (349,600)
                                             ===============    ============

Allocation of Overdistributed Earnings (2)
------------------------------------------
  Preferred                                     $   (210,400)   $   (182,400)
  Common                                            (193,500)       (167,200)
                                             ---------------    ------------
                                                $   (403,900)   $   (349,600)
                                             ===============    ============
Earnings Per Common Share
-------------------------
  Dividends Paid                                $    135,300    $    132,400
  Allocation of Overdistributed Earnings            (193,500)       (167,200)
                                             ---------------    ------------
 
Net loss attributable to common shares          $    (58,200)   $    (34,800)
                                             ===============    ============
 
Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding            90,169          90,169
                                             ===============    ============
 
Net Loss Per Common Share                       $      (0.65)   $      (0.39)
                                             ===============    ============
</TABLE>
Note
----

(1)  Net loss per common share is computed using the two class method.
(2)  Overdistributed earnings are allocated evenly, on a per share basis,
     between common and preferred shares.
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 51 (Thursday, March 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 14305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6497]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

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

    Notice is hereby given that a proposed consent decree in United 
States v. Missouri Electric Works, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 
1:95CV0004 LMB, was lodged on March 9, 1995 with the United States 
District Court for the Easter District of Missouri, Southeastern 
Division. Pursuant to the Consent Decree, Defendants Missouri Electric 
Works, Inc. and David B. Giles, Personal Representative for the Estate 
of Richard H. Giles, Decedent, will pay to the United States $190,000 
and one-half of the net proceeds over $75,000 resulting from the sale 
of the inventory of Missouri Electric Works Inc. These payments will be 
used by the United States for unreimbursed response costs relating to 
the Missouri Electric Works, Inc. Superfund Site in Cape Girardeau, 
Missouri. The Consent Decree includes a covenant not to sue by the 
United States under Section 106 and 107 of the CERCLA, and under 
Section 7003 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (``RCRA''), 
42 U.S.C. 6973.
    The Department of Justice will receive, for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication, comments relating to the 
proposed consent decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant 
Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division, 
Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. 20530, and should refer to 
United States v. Missouri Electric Works, Inc., et al., DOJ Ref. #90-
11-2-614B. Commenters may request an opportunity for a public meeting 
in the affected area, in accordance with Section 7003(d) of RCRA.
    The proposed consent decree may be examined at the office of the 
United States Attorney, Eastern District of Missouri, Southeastern 
Division, 325 Broadway, Second Floor, Cape Girardeau, Missouri; the 
Region VII Office of the Environmental Protection Agency, 726 Minnesota 
Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101; and at the Consent Decree Library, 
1120 G Street, NW., 4th Floor, Washington, DC. 20005, (202) 624-0892. A 
copy of the proposed consent decree may be obtained in person or by 
mail from the Consent Decree Library, 1120 G Street, NW., 4th Floor, 
Washington, DC. 20005. In requesting a copy please refer to the 
referenced case and enclose a check in the amount of $13.25 (25 cents 
per page reproduction costs), payable to the Consent Decree Library.
Joel M. Gross,
Acting Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 95-6497 Filed 3-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
```