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

<ARTICLE> BD
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-24-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-27-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-25-1999
<CASH>                                             248
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,938
<SECURITIES-RESALE>                                377
<SECURITIES-BORROWED>                              483
<INSTRUMENTS-OWNED>                             51,346
<PP&E>                                           1,165
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  96,720
<SHORT-TERM>                                     3,000
<PAYABLES>                                      87,040
<REPOS-SOLD>                                         0
<SECURITIES-LOANED>                                  0
<INSTRUMENTS-SOLD>                                 241
<LONG-TERM>                                      2,574
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            34
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,831
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    96,720
<TRADING-REVENUE>                                2,024
<INTEREST-DIVIDENDS>                             1,615
<COMMISSIONS>                                    7,650
<INVESTMENT-BANKING-REVENUES>                      863
<FEE-REVENUE>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,098
<COMPENSATION>                                   9,092
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    218
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         218
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       225
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14


</TABLE>
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2048

To require a report on the operations of the State Justice Institute.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 5, 2001

Mr. COBLE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on the Judiciary

A BILL

To require a report on the operations of the State Justice

Institute.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL ON STATE

4 JUSTICE INSTITUTE.

5 Section 213 of the State Justice Institute Act of 1984

6 (42 U.S.C. 10712) is amended by striking ‘‘On October

7 1, 1987’’ and inserting ‘‘Not later than October 1, 2002’’.

Æ
1

The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern

District of Iowa, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Paul A.

Zoss, United States Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-1097

___________

Lula M. Lewis, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Northern

* District of Iowa.

Michael J. Astrue, *

Commissioner of Social Security, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: January 6, 2010

Filed: January 8, 2010

___________

Before BYE, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Lulu M. Lewis appeals the district court’s1

 order affirming the denial of

disability insurance benefits. Following our de novo review of the record, we reject

Lewis’s assertions of error and find that the administrative law judge’s decision is

supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See Davidson v. Astrue,
-2-

578 F.3d 838, 841-42 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm.

See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
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 Annual Report of United Diagnostic, Inc., (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, J. Marvin Feigenbaum, President, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the
Board, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

         The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and the information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.


Dated:   February 16, 2005            By: /s/ J. Marvin Feigenbaum
                                          ------------------------
                                          J. Marvin Feigenbaum
                                          President, Chief Executive Officer,
                                          Chairman of the Board, Chief Financial
                                          Officer and Treasurer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,467,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  806,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    50,000
<INVENTORY>                                    374,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,904,000
<PP&E>                                         638,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 184,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,177,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          796,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     5,111,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,086,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,177,000
<SALES>                                      2,952,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,952,000
<CGS>                                        1,927,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,918,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (975,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (975,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.40)
        

</TABLE>
Order entered November 7, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-01268-CR

JENNIFER FOLEY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 26th District Court

Williamson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 14-0094-K26

ORDER

Before the Court is the October 25, 2018 motion to withdraw as counsel filed by 

appellant’s retained counsel, Jeremiah Walters. In his motion, Walters requests permission to 

withdraw on the grounds he is not qualified to represent appellant on appeal.

By filing the notice of appeal, Walters became appellant’s appellate counsel. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 6.1(a). This Court may, on appropriate terms and conditions, permit an attorney to 

withdraw from representation. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5. The motion to withdraw, however, must 

comply with the requirements of rule 6.5. The motion before the Court does not comply with 

rule 6.5 in that it does not contain a statement showing that a copy of the motion was delivered to 

appellant, either by hand delivery or through both certified and first-class mail, and it does not 
–2–

contain a statement that appellant was notified in writing of her right to object to the motion. See 

TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(a)(3-4), (b).

Because the motion does not comply with the requirements of the rules of appellate 

procedure, the motion to withdraw is DENIED without prejudice to refiling a motion that 

conforms to rule 6.5.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
8

A.4. Average Maturity of Non-real-estate Bank Loans Made to FarmersMonths

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 3 10 25 100

All Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sma

Period loans livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid-

1995...... 9.9 8.7 9.9 8.5 26.5 10.0 9.0 10.8 12.1 8.2 1996...... 8.5 7.8 11.3 7.6 29.4 9.2 8.6 10.5 12.1 7.3 1997...... 9.9 9.1 11.0 10.7 30.6 7.4 8.8 11.6 12.4 8.8 1998...... 9.8 8.0 10.3 9.9 27.5 6.8 8.8 11.3 12.5 8.7 1999...... 11.5 8.0 11.0 11.3 20.1 10.5 9.8 11.2 12.4 11.4 2000...... 11.2 8.0 10.8 9.5 22.4 13.2 9.7 11.5 11.1 11.4 2001...... 13.2 8.5 14.0 10.3 24.3 15.3 9.6 11.9 12.5 14.1 2002...... 11.2 8.6 11.5 10.2 23.3 11.7 9.4 10.9 12.5 10.8 2003...... 12.5 8.5 9.4 11.1 26.5 14.4 9.5 11.2 12.7 12.9 2004...... 11.9 9.2 11.9 10.0 23.3 12.0 9.6 11.8 12.9 11.7 2005...... 12.9 9.4 10.0 9.9 18.9 18.3 9.3 11.4 13.5 13.1 2006...... 12.7 8.7 12.9 10.0 15.9 18.3 9.6 11.7 12.6 13.1 2003: Q2... 13.5 6.9 9.0 13.7 21.1 15.0 10.3 12.4 13.3 14.5  Q3... 10.4 8.4 6.4 8.9 21.1 12.4 9.2 10.3 11.1 10.3  Q4... 11.4 9.0 9.9 9.4 24.0 15.7 7.9 10.4 10.6 12.3 2004: Q1... 14.1 7.9 12.4 11.6 28.9 16.8 9.8 12.9 16.0 13.9  Q2... 10.4 8.6 10.5 10.3 18.4 9.2 10.8 11.9 12.2 9.5  Q3... 10.4 7.1 10.6 8.8 27.2 7.0 9.6 12.9 11.7 9.8  Q4... 11.9 10.2 13.2 8.5 17.8 16.9 7.7 9.3 11.1 12.6 2005: Q1... 13.3 10.8 9.9 11.1 46.8 16.5 8.7 12.1 15.2 13.0  Q2... 13.2 9.5 10.5 10.5 14.7 17.4 10.8 12.3 12.6 13.6  Q3... 10.8 8.8 10.0 9.0 13.6 12.8 8.1 11.0 12.7 10.4  Q4... 14.4 8.9 9.8 8.2 28.1 32.4 9.3 9.8 13.4 15.7 2006: Q1... 13.2 7.6 21.2 10.8 21.8 17.0 10.4 13.4 14.0 13.2  Q2... 11.6 8.2 10.1 10.4 12.1 15.0 11.0 12.1 13.2 11.1  Q3... 13.9 9.4 9.3 9.3 24.6 20.2 8.5 11.2 11.3 15.3  Q4... 12.5 9.0 11.4 9.0 14.3 20.6 7.9 9.9 11.4 13.4  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Quarterly estimates annual rate and are based on loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Karen L. Bartlett

v. Civil No. 08-cv-358-JL

Mutual Pharmaceutical Company, Inc.

ORDER

Re: Document No. 292, Motion to Exclude Evidence of

Plaintiff’s Untimely Medical Records

Ruling: Granted in part but denied in part. Based on the

filings and today’s telephone conference, the motion is granted to

the extent that a sanction will be granted, but not the sanction

requested by the defendant. The plaintiff failed to comply with

the discovery deadline, and the violation was neither substantially

justified nor harmless. The plaintiff is ordered, under Rule

37(c)(1)(A), to pay Mutual’s reasonable expenses, to include

paralegal fees but no more than two hours of attorneys’ fees, 

caused by Mutual’s failure. Should the parties be unable to agree

on the amount as proposed and substantiated by Mutual, Mutual

shall seek relief from this court to make that determination.

Should the court’s involvement be required, the court will

determine (a) the amount of the payment, and (b) whether

plaintiff’s counsel shall be required to personally make the

payment. 

/s/ Joseph N. Laplante

Joseph N. Laplante

U.S. District Judge

Date: August 11, 2010

cc: Bryan Ballew, Esq.

Keith M. Jensen, Esq.

Patrick J. O’Neal, Esq.

Christine M. Craig, Esq.

Eric Roberson, Esq.

Timothy P. Beaupre, Esq.

Jeffrey D. Geoppinger, Esq.

Joseph P. Thomas, Esq.

Paul J. Cosgrove, Esq.

Linda E. Maichl, Esq.

Stephen J. Judge, Esq.

Pierre A. Chabot, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00358-JL Document 330 Filed 08/11/10 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1638 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1638

    To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide that 
   geographic reclassifications of hospitals from one urban area to 
  another urban area do not result in lower wage indexes in the urban 
         area in which the hospital was originally classified.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 26, 2001

  Mr. Toomey (for himself, Ms. Hooley of Oregon, Mr. George Miller of 
California, Ms. Kaptur, Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Hall of Ohio, Mr. Pallone, Mr. 
 Menendez, Mr. Watt of North Carolina, Mr. Thompson of California, and 
 Ms. DeLauro) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide that 
   geographic reclassifications of hospitals from one urban area to 
  another urban area do not result in lower wage indexes in the urban 
         area in which the hospital was originally classified.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare Geographic 
Reclassifications Equity Act of 2001''.

SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF WAGE INDEX FOR HOSPITAL GEOGRAPHIC 
              RECLASSIFICATIONS FROM ONE URBAN AREA TO ANOTHER URBAN 
              AREA.

    (a) In General.--Section 1886(d)(8)(C)(ii) of the Social Security 
Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(8)(C)(ii)) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``(I)'' after ``(ii)''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new subclause:
    ``(II) If the application of subparagraph (B) or a decision of the 
Medicare Geographic Classification Review Board or the Secretary under 
paragraph (10), by treating hospitals located in one urban area as 
being located in another urban area reduces the wage index for that one 
urban area (as applied under this subsection), the Secretary shall 
calculate and apply such wage index under this subsection as if the 
hospitals so treated had not been excluded from the calculation of the 
wage index for that one urban area.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) apply to 
cost reporting periods beginning on or after October 1, 2001.
                                 <all>
```
Skip to Content
Release dates
About
Current release
*Other formats:*
 ASCII (48 KB)
PDF (115 KB)
CSV (103 KB)

----

**June 2005**

Section A
Section B

All files contain data as of the current quarter. Files in comma-separated variable (CSV) format contain all available historical data.Section CReserve Bank Surveys of Farm Credit Conditions and Farm Land Values   C.1. Non-real-estate Farm Lending Compared with a Year EarlierASCII (12 KB)PDF (6 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (17 KB)  C.2. Expected Farm Loan Volume for the Next QuarterASCII (11 KB)PDF (6 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (12 KB)  C.3. Indicators of Relative Credit AvailabilityASCII (12 KB)PDF (6 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (14 KB)  C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm LoansASCII (10 KB)PDF (4 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (6 KB)  C.5. Average Variable Interest Rates on Farm LoansASCII (4 KB)PDF (3 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (1 KB)  C.6. Trends in Farm Real Estate Values and Loan VolumeASCII (7 KB)PDF (4 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (12 KB)  C.7. Trends in Farm Income and ExpendituresASCII (4 KB)PDF (3 KB)Screen ReaderCSV (7 KB)Release dates |AboutCurrent release*Other formats:* ASCII (48 KB) |PDF (115 KB) |CSV (103 KB)
Statistical releases
Home |Economic research and dataAccessibility |Contact Us**Last update: August 25, 2005**
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Christopher G. Fournier

v. Civil No. 08-cv-338-JD

Warden, Northern New Hampshire

Correctional Facility

O R D E R

Counsel appointed to represent Christopher G. Fournier filed

an affidavit in support of his CJA 20 Voucher that sought fees in

excess of the maximum amount. The affidavit was docketed as a

motion. The matter has been resolved, and the motion (document

no. 61) is terminated.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

March 16, 2011

cc: Harry C. Batchelder, Jr., Esquire

Stephen D. Fuller, Sr., Esquire

Elizabeth C. Woodcock, Esquire

Case 1:08-cv-00338-JD Document 62 Filed 03/16/11 Page 1 of 1
#### DOLL v. SEWERAGE & WATER BOARD OF NEW ORLEANS.

No. 19243.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Jan. 6, 1950.

see 43 So.2d 271.

George Piazza, New Orleans, for defendant and appellant.

Delvaille H. Theard, New Orleans, for plaintiff and appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We rendered our opinion and decree herein on December 12, 1949, 43 So.2d 271. The appeal was taken from a judgment of the First City Court of New Orleans.

On December 23, 1949, plaintiff-appellee applied for a rehearing.

The application comes too late, as our judgment became final and executory on the sixth calendar day after rendition, and it was only during the interval that the parties in interest had the right to apply for a rehearing. See Act No. 16 of 1910, Dart’s Gen.Stat. 1450. ^

We have no right, then, to consider the application.

Application for rehearing not considered.
Chart 1

Number, Size, and Volume of Non-real-estate Farm Loans, 1980-2005

 -- Four-quarter moving average.

 Source. Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers.

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

1

2

3

4

5

Number of non-real-estate farm loans Millions, annual rate

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

10

20

30

40

50

Average size of non-real-estate farm loans Thousands of dollars

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

25

50

75

100

125

Volume of non-real-estate farm loans

3

Billions of dollars, annual rate
Chart 2

Maturity and Interest Rate of Non-real-estate Farm Loans, 1980-2005

 Note. Effective (compounded) annual interest rates are calculated from the stated rate and other

 terms of the loans and weighted by loan size.

 -- Four-quarter moving average.

 Source. Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers.

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

4

8

12

16

Average maturity of non-real-estate farm loans 20

Months

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

4

8

12

16

Average effective interest rate on non-real-estate farm loans 20

Percent

1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

0

25

50

75

100 Share of farm loans with a floating interest rate

4

Percent
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,

Petitioner 

v.

KEITH ALAN BASSI,

 Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 2406 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 119 DB 2017

Attorney Registration No. 36248

(Washington County)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 21st day of December, 2017, upon consideration of the Verified 

Statement of Resignation, Keith Alan Bassi is disbarred on consent from the Bar of the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, retroactive to August 16, 2017. See Pa.R.D.E. 215. 

Respondent shall comply with the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217 and pay costs to the 

Disciplinary Board. See Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1


                              THOUSAND TRAILS, INC.
                 STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                    (Dollars and common shares in thousands)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           Nine Months     Nine Months
                                                              Ended           Ended
                                                          March 31, 2000  March 31, 1999
                                                          --------------  --------------
<S>                                                       <C>             <C>
BASIC:

Weighted average number of common shares outstanding           7,981           7,550
                                                              ======          ======

Net income allocable to common shareholders                   $3,056          $4,445
                                                              ======          ======

Net income per common share -- basic                          $ 0.38          $ 0.59
                                                              ======          ======

DILUTED:

Weighted average number of common shares outstanding           7,981           7,550
Weighted average common stock equivalents -
  Dilutive options                                               624             887
  Dilutive warrants                                               --              22
                                                              ------          ------

Weighted average number of common shares outstanding           8,605           8,459
                                                              ======          ======

Net income allocable to common shareholders                   $3,056          $4,445
                                                              ======          ======

Net income per common share -- diluted                        $ 0.35          $ 0.53
                                                              ======          ======
</TABLE>


                                  Page 1 of 1