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

<ARTICLE>      5
       
<S>                                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                    DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1998
<CASH>                                                      32,613,000
<SECURITIES>                                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                               20,388,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                                (1,582,000)
<INVENTORY>                                                  7,635,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                             9,613,000
<PP&E>                                                     199,834,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                             (74,412,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             373,460,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       47,817,000
<BONDS>                                                    355,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                0
<PREFERRED>                                                          0
<COMMON>                                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                                 (38,514,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             373,460,000
<SALES>                                                     24,093,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           177,225,000
<CGS>                                                       22,071,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               39,039,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            68,389,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          26,158,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                             10,265,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                                (4,208,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                          6,057,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                      0
<CHANGES>                                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                                 6,057,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                        0
        

</TABLE>
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 19, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3510

JLG Industries, Inc:

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
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

STATEMENT UNDER OATH OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER REGARDING FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES RELATING TO EXCHANGE ACT FILINGS

I, Steven J. Douglass, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Payless
ShoeSource, Inc. ("Payless"), state and attest that:

(1)  To the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the covered reports of
     Payless, and, except as corrected or supplemented in a subsequent covered
     report:

     o    no covered report contained an untrue statement of a material fact as
          of the end of the period covered by such report (or in the case of a
          report on Form 8-K or definitive proxy materials, as of the date on
          which it was filed); and

     o    no covered report omitted to state a material fact necessary to make
          the statements in the covered report, in light of the circumstances
          under which they were made, not misleading as of the end of the period
          covered by such report (or in the case of a report on Form 8-K or
          definitive proxy materials, as of the date on which it was filed).

(2)  I have reviewed the contents of this statement with Payless' Audit and
     Finance Committee.

(3)  In this statement under oath, each of the following, if filed on or before
     the date of this statement, is a "covered report":

     o    2001 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Payless filed with the Commission;

     o    all reports on Form 10-Q, all reports on Form 8-K and all definitive
          proxy materials of Payless filed with the Commission subsequent to the
          filing of the Form 10-K identified above; and

     o    any amendments to any of the foregoing.

                                       Subscribed and sworn to before me this
/s/ Steven J. Douglass                 13th day of September, 2002.
------------------------------
Steven J. Douglass
Chairman of the Board and Chief        /s/ Deborah A. Ortega
Executive Officer                      --------------------------------------
Payless ShoeSource, Inc.               Notary Public
September 13, 2002                     My Commission Expires: December 2, 2004
3XEOLF9HUVLRQRI%&,

3803,03(//(5&$67,1*35(6685(&217$,1,1*67$,1/(6667((/



3,$==$52%(57

35,&(3803&203$1<

2WKHU

12

3XEOLF9HUVLRQRI%&,
 .*

<(6

12

 .*

 

,03257,1*7+,63$57)520&+,1$&2676

385&+$6,1*5$:0$7(5,$/$1'0$&+,1,1*,7'20(67,&$//<&267
EXHIBIT 32.1



                                  EXHIBIT 32.1



                              Certification of CEO
                  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
            Act of 2002 regarding Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for
                       the quarter ended October 31, 2005

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
(a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), does hereby
certify that:

         1. The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal period
ended October 31, 2005, (the Form 10Q-SB) fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
and

         2. Information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.





Date:    March 31, 2006               By: /s/ Joseph Kristul
         --------------               --------------------------------------
                                          Joseph Kristul
                                          Chief Executive Officer

<PAGE>

                              Certification of CFO
                         pursuant to Section 906 of the
              Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 regarding Quarterly Report
              on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended October 31, 2005

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
(a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), does hereby
certify that:

         1. The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal period
ended October 31, 2005, (the Form 10Q-SB) fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
and

         2. Information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.




Date:    March 31, 2006                           By: /s/ Thomas Schott
         --------------                              --------------------------
                                                      Thomas Schott
                                                      Chief Financial Officer
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center: Madison, WI
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Archives
                        Presentations
                                    World Dairy Expo
                                    Newsletters and Research Summaries
                    Resources
                        General Resources
                                    Books
                                    Teacher's Resources
                                    New Research Dairy Updates
                                    Integrated Research at USDFRCSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Madison, Wisconsin U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center Research





- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications
- IACUC Summaries - Milwaukee, WI Aquaculture
- IACUC Summaries - US Dairy Forage Research Center

Research Projects Subjects of Investigation at this LocationEach ARS research project has related subjects of investigation.  Listed below are the subjects of investigation currently conducted at this location.
Clicking on a subject of investigation will list the research projects within that  subject of investigation.


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Baker, Benton and Overton 

Argued at Norfolk, Virginia 

VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 1146-96-2 JUDGE JAMES W. BENTON, JR. 

 NOVEMBER 26, 1996 

RICHARD LESLIE EDMUNDS 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 Ingrid E. Olson, Assistant Attorney 

 General (James S. Gilmore, III, 

 Attorney General; Gregory Lucyk, 

 Senior Assistant Attorney General, 

 on brief), for appellant. 

 B. Mayes Marks, Jr., for appellee. 

 Virginia Commonwealth University appeals from a decision of 

the Workers' Compensation Commission denying the University's 

request to suspend an award of compensation to Richard L. 

Edmunds. The University raises three issues, which collectively 

assert that Edmunds was ineligible for workers' compensation 

benefits because Edmunds was receiving "wages" pursuant to the 

Workforce Transition Act. 

 For the reasons cogently stated in Department of Transp. v. 

Swiney, ___ Va. App. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___ (1996), we hold that 

payments made pursuant to the Workforce Transition Act are not 

"wages" for purposes of the Workers' Compensation Act. "The 

payments made [to Edmunds] pursuant to the [Workforce Transition 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

Act] agreement . . . were not for work performed or services 

rendered to [the University] in anticipation of compensation, but 

were to induce [Edmunds] not to perform work for [the 

University]." Id. at ___, ___ S.E.2d at ___. Accordingly, we 

affirm the commission's decision. 

 Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 10.11

                                 PROMISSORY NOTE

$85,000, Alameda,  California,  August 14, 1998, VALUESTAR, INC. after date, for
value received,  undersigned promise to pay to DAVRIC CORPORATION,  or order, at
980 American Pacific Dr., Suite 111, Henderson, NV 89104, the sum of Eighty Five
Thousand and no/100  DOLLARS,  with interest from August 14, 1998 until paid, at
the rate of fifteen  (15) per cent per annum,  payable  $2,022.15 on the 14th of
each month for five years  until paid in full.  A late charge of 10% will be due
if payment not paid within 10 days of due date.

Should  interest not be so paid it shall  thereafter  bear like  interest as the
principal,  but such unpaid  interest so  compounded  shall not exceed an amount
equal to simple  interest on the unpaid  principal at the maximum rate permitted
by law.  Should default be made in payment of interest when due the whole sum of
principal and interest shall become  immediately due at the option of the holder
of this note. Maker may,  without charge or penalty,  prepay this Note, in whole
or in part. Principal and interest payable in lawful money of the United States.
If action be  instituted on this note I promise to pay such sum as the Court may
fix as  attorney's  fees in  said  action.  This  note  shall  be  construed  in
accordance with the laws of the State of Nevada.

VALUESTAR, INC.

/s/ JIM STEIN
Jim Stein
Pres.

There  will be a UCC filed in favor of Davric  Corporation  for the  equipment*,
which is collateral for this note.
*equipment more specifically
described as telephone equipment


/s/ JIM STEIN
VALUESTAR, INC.
Pres.
#### J. W. SUTTON v. GUY SUTTON, JOE SUTTON, MRS. NORA PATRICK, and FRANK WOOTEN, Trustee.

(Filed 7 April, 1937.)

Tenants in Common § 6—

One tenant in common, under obligation to discharge an encumbrance on tbe land, may not procure a foreclosure sale thereunder and acquire, directly or indirectly, the title to the entire interest to the exclusion of his cotenant.

Appeal by defendant Guy Sutton from *Sinclair, J.,*at September Term, 1936, of Pitt.

Affirmed.

Action to set aside foreclosure sale and deed, and also to have defendant Guy Sutton declared to bold one-balf interest in tbe described land in trust for tbe plaintiff.

Tbe defendants demurred (1) on tbe ground of misjoinder of parties and causes of action, and (2) tbat tbe complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Pending tbe bearing and before judgment, plaintiff took a voluntary nonsuit as to all defendants except Guy Sutton.

From judgment overruling demurrer as to bim, defendant Guy Sutton appealed.

*II. Q. Garier and J. H. Harrell for plaintiff, appellee.*

*Albion Dunn for Guy Sutton, defendant.*

PeR Cueiam.

The material allegations in the complaint setting forth a cause of action against the defendant Guy Sutton may be stated concisely as follows: that in 1926 the plaintiff J. *W.*Sutton, the father, and defendant Guy Sutton, the son, purchased as tenants in common certain land at the price of $16,300, the plaintiff paying one-half therefor in cash, and be and defendant Guy Sutton executed deed of trust on the land for the remaining one-half of the purchase price, which deed of trust the defendant Guy Sutton agreed to pay off and discharge; that defendant failed to pay off the deed of trust which represented bis one-half of the purchase price; that plaintiff was adjudged *non compos mentis*in 1927, and remained in that condition until 1934, when be was adjudged sane; that while plaintiff was insane, defendant Guy Sutton instigated and procured the sale of the land under foreclosure for the purpose of depriving plaintiff of bis interest in the land and acquiring the title to the entire interest therein in himself, and that defendant Guy Sutton thereupon took title from the purchaser at the foreclosure sale, upon the execution of a deed of trust on the land for the *473purported sale price of $5,778, and now bolds tbe said land to tbe exclusion of tbe plaintiff.

It is apparent that the facts alleged are sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the appellant and that the demurrer was properly overruled. One tenant in common, under obligation to discharge an encumbrance on the land, may not procure a foreclosure sale thereunder and acquire, either directly or indirectly, the title to the entire interest in the land to the exclusion of bis cotenant. Equity will declare him to have purchased for the benefit of the other. *Bailey v.*Howell, 209 N. C., 712; *Gentry v. Gentry,*187 N. C., 29; *Smith v. Smith,*150 N. C., 81.

Affirmed.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                    PAYLESS SHOESOURCE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                      COMPUTATION OF NET EARNINGS PER SHARE
                                   (UNAUDITED)

(Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share)

<Table>
<Caption>
                                                             13 WEEKS ENDED                         26 WEEKS ENDED
                                                    ---------------------------------     ----------------------------------
                                                    AUGUST 3, 2002     AUGUST 4, 2001     AUGUST 3, 2002      AUGUST 4, 2001
                                                    --------------     --------------     --------------      --------------

<S>                                                 <C>                <C>                <C>                 <C>
Basic Computation:

Net earnings                                            $47,189            $36,400            $71,122            $66,050

Weighted average common shares outstanding               22,620             22,250             22,517             22,201
                                                        -------            -------            -------            -------

Basic earnings per share                                $  2.09            $  1.64            $  3.16            $  2.98
                                                        =======            =======            =======            =======

Diluted Computation:

Net earnings                                            $47,189            $36,400            $71,122            $66,050

Weighted average common shares outstanding               22,620             22,250             22,517             22,201
                                                        -------            -------            -------            -------

Net effect of dilutive stock options based on
     the treasury stock method                              184                542                257                589
                                                        -------            -------            -------            -------

Outstanding shares for diluted earnings per share        22,804             22,793             22,773             22,790
                                                        =======            =======            =======            =======

Diluted earnings per share                              $  2.07            $  1.60            $  3.12            $  2.90
                                                        =======            =======            =======            =======
</Table>

Note: Basic earnings per share are computed by dividing net earnings by the
weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period.
Diluted earnings per share include the effect of conversions of options.
#### MRS. RUBYE A. LOWRY v. SCOTT DILLINGHAM.

(Filed 18 September, 1957.)

Appeal and Error § 16—

In order to preserve the right to review a judgment overruling a demurrer other than a demurrer for misjoinder of parties and causes or demurrer to the jurisdiction, appellant must move for *certiorari*within thirty days from the entry of such judgment. Rule of Practice in the Supreme Court 4(a).

DependaNT appeals from an order, overruling a demurrer to the complaint, entered by *Sink, E. J.,*May 27, 1957 Term, Buncombe.

The complaint in substance alleges: Defendant procured Hazel Rice to execute a negotiable note to him in 1954 for $50,000, purporting to be for the purchase of real estate in Buncombe County, and secured by deed of trust on the land; on 13 May 1955 plaintiff was induced to purchase the note by the false and fraudulent representations of defendant’s agent (a) that Hazel Rice was solvent, (b) that the note was in fact a purchase money note, (c) that prior encumbrances on the property were not in default, (d) that the property had originally sold for $150,000, (e) that defendant was a man of large means and financially responsible; that defendant guaranteed payment of the note; that the note has matured but has not been paid, though demands have been made for payment on both the maker and the defendant. Plaintiff seeks to recover the sum of $50,000 with interest, with the right to have execution against the person.

Defendant demurred for that: (1) the complaint states a cause of action against the defendant and his agents and the agents have not been made parties defendant; (2) plaintiff has attempted to assert distinct causes of action without stating each as a separate cause of action; (3) the note referred to did not in fact disclose that defendant .had guaranteed payment; (4) the allegations of the complaint were vague and indefinite and did not set out the time when and place where the fraudulent representations were made; and (5) the complaint did not allege that plaintiff had listed and paid taxes on the note.

*Horner & Gilbert for plaintiff appellee.*

*Styles & Styles for defendant appellant.*

*619Per Cueiam.

The statute, G.S. 1-127, énumerates the cases in which a demurrer may be appropriately interposed. Rule 4(a) of the Court, 242 N.C. 766, fixes the time when a litigant may, by appeal, review a judgment overruling a demurrer. *Winston-Salem v. Coach Lines,*245 N.C. 179. The rules are mandatory and when ignored an appeal will be dismissed. *S. v. McNeill,*239 N.C. 679, 80 S.E. 2d 680; *Pruitt v. Wood,*199 N.C. 788, 156 S.E. 126. This appeal is not permitted by the rule. The appeal is

Dismissed.