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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       1,143,312
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,777,197
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,000,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,934,822
<PP&E>                                         279,413
<DEPRECIATION>                                  42,325
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,171,910
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,624
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       230,061
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,921,225
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,171,910
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               133,083
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             9,153,331
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,575
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (9,021,823)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Peter J. Aliseo, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Westchester County (Rosato, J.), both rendered May 6, 1987, convicting him of burglary in the third degree under indictment No. 87-00363-01 and burglary in the second degree under indictment No. 87-00372-01, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 99
                             Selected Information
                              Relating to Series
                    1994-1 Certificates, Series 1995-1
                       Certificates, Series 1996-1
                Certificates, Series 1996-2 Certificates, and
                       Series 1997-1 Certificates from
                  January 1, 1999 through December 31, 1999
                 --------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>



                Series 1994-1    Series 1995-1     Series 1996-1   Series 1996-2    Series 1997-1
                Floating Rate    6.50% Auto        5.50% Auto      Floating Rate    Floating Rate
                Loan Asset       Loan Asset        Loan Asset      Loan Asset       Loan Asset
                Backed           Backed            Backed          Backed           Backed
                Certificates     Certificates      Certificates    Certificates     Certificates
                ------------     -------------     -------------   ------------     ------------
<S>             <C>               <C>             <C>              <C>               <C>


Interest
Paid            $ 30,950,947.78   $ 64,631,333.31 $ 43,995,833.37  $ 52,073,674.13 $ 39,921,906.25

Servicing
Fee Paid        $  5,833,333.31   $  9,999,999.96 $  8,000,000.04  $  9,600,000.00 $  7,500,000.00










</TABLE>

                                      -12-
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 56 (Thursday, March 23, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Pages 15327-15328]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7386]



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


MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

time and date: 10:00 a.m., Monday, April 3, 1995.

place: Francis Perkins Hearing Room, Ninth Floor, 1120 Vermont Avenue, 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20419.

status: The meeting will be open to the public.

matters to be considered: Establishment of task force to recommend 
changes in the structure of the Board that will allow the Board to meet 
budgetary requirements of [[Page 15328]] National Performance Review II 
through fiscal year 2000.

contact person for additional information: Robert E. Taylor, Clerk of 
the Board, (202) 653-7200.

    Dated: March 21, 1995.
Robert E. Taylor,
Clerk of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-7386 Filed 3-21-95; 3:05 pm]
BILLING CODE 7400-01-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2693

Primex Family of Companies:

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 the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

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
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 21, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14999-15000]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6923]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service


Renewable Electricity Production Credit, Publication of Inflation 
Adjustment Factor and Reference Prices for Calendar Year 1995

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

[[Page 15000]] ACTION: Publication of inflation adjustment factor and 
reference prices for calendar year 1995 as required by section 
45(d)(2)(A) (26 U.S.C. 45(d)(2)(A)).

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

SUMMARY: The 1995 inflation adjustment factor and reference prices are 
used in determining the availability of the renewable electricity 
production credit under section 45(a).

DATES: The 1995 inflation adjustment factor and reference prices apply 
to calendar year 1995 sales of kilowatt hours of electricity produced 
in the United States or a possession thereof from qualified energy 
resources.

INFLATION ADJUSTMENT FACTOR: The inflation adjustment factor for 
calendar year 1995 is 1.0430.

REFERENCE PRICES: The reference prices for calendar year 1995 are 
5.4 cents per kilowatt hour for facilities producing electricity from 
wind and 0 cents per kilowatt hour for facilities producing electricity 
from closed-loop biomass. The reference price for electricity produced 
from closed-loop biomass, as defined in section 45(c)(2), is based on a 
determination under section 45(d)(2)(C) that in calendar year 1994 
there were no sales of electricity generated from closed-loop biomass 
energy resources under contracts entered into after December 31, 1989.
    Because the 1995 reference prices for electricity produced from 
wind and closed-loop biomass energy resources do not exceed 8 cents 
multiplied by the inflation adjustment factor, the phaseout of the 
credit provided in section 45(b)(1) does not apply to electricity sold 
during calendar year 1995.
CREDIT AMOUNT: As required by section 45(b)(2), the 1.5 cents amount in 
section 45(a)(1) is adjusted by multiplying such amount by the 
inflation adjustment factor for the calendar year in which the sale 
occurs. If any amount as increased under the preceding sentence is not 
a multiple of 0.1 cents, such amount is rounded to the nearest multiple 
of 0.1%. Under the calculation required by section 45(b)(2), the 
renewable electricity production credit for calendar year 1995 under 
section 45(a) is 1.6 cents per kilowatt hour on the sale of electricity 
produced from closed-loop biomass and wind energy resources.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David A. Selig, IRS, CC:DOM:P&SI:5, 
1111 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20224, (202) 622-3040 (not 
a toll-free call).
Judith C. Dunn,
Associate Chief Counsel (Domestic).
[FR Doc. 95-6923 Filed 3-20-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-U
Exhibit 23.1



INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-97341, 333-49528, 333-01044, 333-38354, 033-55792-NY, 333-69311, 333-30054,
333-32642, 333-69134 and 333-109368 on Form S-3 and in Registration Statement
Nos. 333-01048 and 333-31832 on Form S-8 of Greg Manning Auctions, Inc. of our
report dated September 7, 2004 relating to the financial statements which appear
in this Form 10-K of Greg Manning Auctions, Inc.


/s/ Amper, Politziner & Mattia P.C.

Edison, New Jersey
September 7, 2004
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1


                            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 Quarterly Report of Bright Horizons Family
Solutions, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), each of the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 results of
         operations of the Company.


                                      By: /s/ David H. Lissy
                                          ---------------------------
                                           David H. Lissy
                                           Chief Executive Officer
                                           November 14, 2003


                                      By:  /s/ Elizabeth J. Boland
                                           --------------------------
                                           Elizabeth J. Boland
                                           Chief Financial Officer
                                           November 14, 2003

                                       25
#### STANDARD FERTILIZER COMPANY v. W. H. WHORTON, GERALD V. WHORTON, and BETTIE E. WHORTON.

(Filed 2 March, 1938.)

Judgments § 23—

Defendants duly served with summons are not entitled to set aside a judgment by default final for surprise or excusable neglect because they bad no notice that tbe case was calendared for trial and no notice of the trial.

Appeal by defendants from *Johnston, J.,*at June Term, 1937, of MartiN. Affirmed.

Motion to set aside verdict and judgment heretofore rendered in tbe cause, on tbe ground of inadvertence and excusable neglect. From an adverse ruling defendants appealed.

*Coburn & Coburn for plaintiff, appellee.*

*Z. V. Bawls for defendants, appellants.*

*212Per Curiam:.

The court below found the material facts as follows: Summons was issued 16 February, 1935, and duly served on defendants. The complaint set out a cause of action for debt evidenced by a note secured by a mortgage on certain personal property, and plaintiff asked for the possession of the property for the purpose of enforcing its lien. No answer was filed, and at September Term, 1935, of the Superior Court of Martin County there was verdict and judgment for plaintiff for the balance of its debt ($385.03), and the plaintiff was adjudged entitled to the possession of the described property. Defendants are residents of Pamlico County and had no actual notice that the case was calendared for trial or of the trial, and the personal property was at the time of issuance of summons in Pamlico County.

On 15 March, 1935, defendants instituted an action in Pamlico County against plaintiff involving the same subject matter, and secured restraining order restraining the plaintiff herein from foreclosing its lien on the described personal property. When the case in Pamlico County came on for trial there at April Term, 1937, upon admissions by counsel for plaintiff and defendants, that the matters involved there were the same as those in the Martin County case, the presiding judge there (Erizzelle) dismissed the action, but by consent the restraining order was continued, pending the decision of this motion in Martin County.

Upon these facts the court found that defendants were not taken by surprise and have not shown excusable neglect, and their motion to set aside judgment was denied.

The facts found by the judge of the Superior Court are sufficient to sustain the judgment and his ruling must be

Affirmed.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CAROL THOMAS,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

SAN FRANCISCO COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT,

Defendant

- Appellee

. No. 17

- 15766

D.C. No. 4:15

- cv

- 05504

- HSG

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 18, 2017 **

Before: WALLACE , SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Carol Thomas appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

her action alleging race discrimination under Title VI and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 . We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for

failure to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Ebner v. Fresh, Inc ., 838

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

DEC 26 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 15766

F.3d 958, 962 (9th Cir. 2016). We affirm.

The d istrict court properly dismissed Thomas’ s Title VI discrimination claim

because Thomas failed to allege facts sufficient to show that the defendant

discriminated against Thomas on the basis of her race. See Fobbs v. Holy Cross

Health Sys. Corp ., 29 F.3d 1439, 1447 (9th Cir. 1994) (setting forth pleading

requirements for stating a Title VI discrimination claim), overruled on other

grounds by Daviton v . Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corp ., 241 F.3d 1131 (9th Cir.

2001) (en banc); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal , 556 U.S. 6 62, 678 (2009) (to avoid

dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to

state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face” (citation and internal quotation

marks omitted))

.

The district court properly dismissed Thomas’s § 1981 claim because the

defendant is immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment. See Mitchell v.

Los Angeles Cmty. Coll. Dist ., 86 1 F.2d 198, 201

- 02 (9th Cir. 1988) (explaining

that “under the eleventh amendment, agencies of the state are immune from private

damage actions or suits for injunctive relief brought in federal court”).

Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Docket Entry No. 24) is denied as

unnecessary.

AFFIRMED.
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Tracy Kathleen Chambers

, * From the County Court at Law

of Taylor County,

Trial Court No. 1

- 1169

- 17

.

Vs. No. 11

- 1 8

- 00 227

- CR * August 20 , 20 20

The State of Texas

, * Memorand um Opinion by Wright

, S. C.J.

(P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J.,

Stretcher , J. , and Wright, S.C.J.,

sitting by assignment )

( Willson , J., not participating)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opi nion,

the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
27.

Line

No.

29.

A. HTSUS No. 

B. ADA/CVD No. 

28. Description of Merchandise

30.

A. Grossweight 

B. Manifest Qty.

31.

Net Quantity in 

HTSUS Units 

32.

 A. Entered Value

 B. CHGS

 C. Relationship 

33. 34.

Duty and I.R. Tax 

 Dollars Cents

 A. HTSUS Rate

 B. ADA/CVD Rate

 C. IRC Rate

 D. Visa No.

CBP Form 7501 (06/09)

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

OMB No. 1651-0022

ENTRY SUMMARY CONTINUATION SHEET EXP. 03-31-2012

1. Filer Code/Entry No.

 Page 2

 231-1175973-7 Speck Pumps - Pool Products Inc

 Expeditors Int'l MCO

 2544 East Landstreet Road 719379938 CR

 Suite 100

 Orlando, FL 32824

 Phone: 407-816-0186 Fax: 407-816-7234

 002 OTHER PUMP PARTS, NSPF

 8413.91.9080 7539 41625 FREE 0.00

 C 3123

 Merchandise Processing Fee 0.3464% 144.19

 Invoice Value USD 42201.38

 Entered Value USD 42201

 PAGE 2 (LAST)

 V001
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 56 (Thursday, March 23, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15275-15276]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7122]



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


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 95-32, RM-8545]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Parker and Port St. Joe, Florida

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a petition filed by 
Southern Broadcasting Companies, Inc., licensee of Station WPBH, 
Channel 233C, Port St. Joe, Florida, requesting the reallotment of 
Channel 233C from Port St. Joe, Florida, to Parker, Florida, and the 
modification of its license to specify Parker as its community of 
license, in accordance with Section 1.420(i) of the Commission's rules. 
The coordinates for Channel 233C at Parker are North Latitude 29-49-09 
and West Longitude 85-15-34.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before May 11, 1995,and reply 
comments on or before May 26, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554. 
In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should 
serve the petitioner, or its counsel or consultant, as follows: Gary S. 
Smithwick, Shaun A. Maher, Smithwick & Belendiuk, P.C., 1990 M Street, 
NW, Suite 510, Washington, D.C. 20036 (Attorneys for Petitioner).

[[Page 15276]] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy J. Walls, Mass 
Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. 95-32, adopted March 20, 
1995, and released March 20, 1995. The full text of this Commission 
decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW, 
Washington, D.C. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractors, International 
Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1919 M Street, NW, Room 
246, or 2100 M Street, NW, Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037.
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply 
to this proceeding.
    Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to 
Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are 
prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve 
channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing 
permissible ex parte contacts.
    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 95-7122 Filed 3-22-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
Exhibit 23.1
















                          Independent Auditors' Consent



We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
33-70478 and 333-62245) on Form S-8 and (Nos. 333-12893 and 333-47621) on Form
S-3 of Prime Medical Services, Inc. of our report dated February 27, 2002,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Prime Medical Services, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the related consolidated
statements of income, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years
in the three-year period ended December 31, 2001 which report appears in the
December 31, 2001, Annual Report on Form 10-K of Prime Medical Services, Inc.


/s/:KPMG LLP

Austin, Texas
February 27, 2002
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

July 3, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-3926

ECM Industries LLC:

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 did not contain a sufficient product identification or was 

determined to be non-administrable.

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,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel