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

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           3,030
<SECURITIES>                                     7,140
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,259
<ALLOWANCES>                                       197
<INVENTORY>                                      1,450
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,681
<PP&E>                                          17,305
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,178
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  37,909
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,678
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           124
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,769
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    37,909
<SALES>                                         24,864
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                50,223
<CGS>                                            8,238
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   18,302
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                25,626
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   7
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,078
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,902
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,176
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,176
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .67
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*David Joseph Reiner, Appellant.

County Court, Westchester County,

April 2, 1957.

*Morris B. Gerstenhaber*for appellant.

*Joseph F. Gagliardi, District Attorney (Warren J. Schneider*of counsel), for respondent.

Harold T. Garrity, J.

Defendant appeals from a conviction for violation of subdivision 24 of section 81 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law which requires motorists to come to a complete stop in overtaking or meeting a school bus which is discharging or receiving passengers, provided there are flashing red signals and appropriate signs indicating the special character of the bus.

There is sharp conflict in the testimony as to whether the school bus had actually come to a stop and whether the blinking rear signal lights were working. The trial court obviously determined the defendant’s guilt on the basis of the testimony of the bus driver and the police officer.

The only issue raised is whether defendant’s guilt was established beyond a reasonable doubt. The record does not warrant our concluding as a matter of law that the conviction was erroneous.

Judgment of conviction affirmed. Submit appropriate order.
#### Essie MALACHI v. STATE.

3 Div. 761.

Court of Appeals of Alabama.

May 14, 1935.

BICE, .Judge..

Appeal dismissed.
56855-0011/LEGAL22781350.1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge John L. Kane

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02602-JLK

JEANNE HARRINGTON,

STEPHEN D. MCLEOD,

PAUL NEWLIN,

BARBARA NEWLIN,

LOUISE K. PETERSON,

STEVEN TOBASH,

ALMA TOBASH, and 

LILLIAN WINDSOR,

Plaintiffs,

v.

OPPENHEIMERFUNDS, INC., a Colorado Corporation,

OPPENHEIMERFUNDS DISTRIBUTOR, INC., 

a New York Corporation, and 

ANGELO MANIOUDAKIS, 

Defendants.

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR STAY

Defendants OppenheimerFunds, Inc., OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. and Angelo 

Manioudakis (collectively ‘Defendants’), hereby move this Court to enter an Order to stay this 

case. In support of this Motion, Defendants state as follows:

1. The Parties engaged in mediation on January 4-5, 2012.

2. The Parties have agreed, in principle, to a resolution of these cases.

3. The Parties anticipate that they will be able to negotiate a settlement agreement 

and dismiss these cases within the next 60 days.

Case 1:11-cv-02602-JLK Document 5 Filed 02/15/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3
2

56855-0011/LEGAL22781350.1

4. Defendants request that the proceedings should be stayed through and including 

Friday, April 13, 2012 to allow the Parties to fully document the settlement and to prepare the 

appropriate dismissal papers.

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1A

Pursuant to D.C.Colo.L.CivR. 7.1A, this will certify that counsel for Defendants 

conferred with counsel for Plaintiffs, and counsel for Plaintiffs consents to the relief requested.

DATED this 15th day of February, 2012.

s/ Stephanie Dunn

Stephanie E. Dunn

Perkins Coie LLP

1900 Sixteenth Street, Suite 1400

Denver, CO 80202-5255

Tel: 303.291.2300

Fax: 303.291.2400

Email: sdunn@perkinscoie.com

And

William K. Dodds

Matthew L. Larrabee

Dechert, LLP-New York 

1095 Avenue of the Americas 

New York, NY 10036 

212-698-3500 

215-698-3599 (fax) 

Email: william.dodds@dechert.com

Attorneys for Defendants OppenheimerFunds, Inc., 

OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. and Angelo 

Manioudakis

Case 1:11-cv-02602-JLK Document 5 Filed 02/15/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 3
3

56855-0011/LEGAL22781350.1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 15th day of February, 2012, I electronically filed a true and 

correct copy of the foregoing UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR STAY with the Clerk of Court 

using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following email 

addresses:

 Stephanie Erin Dunn 

sdunn@perkinscoie.com,sdunn-efile@perkinscoie.com 

 David Paul Neuman 

daveneuman@stoltlaw.com

s/ Stephanie Dunn

Stephanie E. Dunn

Perkins Coie LLP

1900 Sixteenth Street, Suite 1400

Denver, CO 80202-5255

Tel: 303.291.2300

Fax: 303.291.2400

Email: sdunn@perkinscoie.com

Attorneys for Defendants OppenheimerFunds, Inc., 

OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. and Angelo 

Manioudakis

Case 1:11-cv-02602-JLK Document 5 Filed 02/15/12 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 3
Case 1:11-cv-02491-PAB Document 6 Filed 10/13/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Case 1:11-cv-02491-PAB Document 6 Filed 10/13/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

WESTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

BRIAN BANTUM, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 330 WAL 2015 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 9th day of March, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED. 

Justice Eakin and Justice Wecht did not participate in the consideration or 

decision of this matter.
#### Akron-Wooster Coach Lines, Inc., *v.*Public Utilities Commission of Ohio.

(No. 24846

Decided December 19, 1934.)

*Messrs. Fotist & Holden*and *Mr. D. H.*Armstrong, for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. John W. Bricher,*attorney general, and *Mr. Donald C. Power,*for defendant in error.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the order of the said Public Utilities Commission of Ohio be, and the same is hereby, affirmed for the reason that the record does not show the establishment of practically through and continuous service between Wooster and Akron, and therefore the granting of the certificate between Lodi and Akron, herein involved, is not in conflict with the pronouncement of this court in *Dayton $ Xenia Motorbus*Co, v. *Public Utilities Commission,*115 Ohio St., 706, preserving the rights of existing carriers.

*Order affirmed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Garver, Hart, Stephenson, Jones and Matthias, JJ., concur.

Williams, J., not participating.
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit 23.1



                CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



     We have issued our report dated November 3, 1998, accompanying the
consolidated financial statements included in the Annual Report of Ciprico Inc.
and subsidiaries on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 1998.  We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration
Statement of Ciprico Inc. and Subsidiaries on Forms S-8 (File No. 33-47840, File
No. 33-78116, File No. 33-64999, File No. 33-65001, File No. 333-02931, File No.
333-02933, File No. 333-42841, File No. 333-42843 and File No. 333-42845).




/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP


Minneapolis, Minnesota
December 11, 1998
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports:Boston |New York |Philadelphia |Cleveland |Richmond |AtlantaChicago |St. Louis |Minneapolis |Kansas City |Dallas |San FranciscoDistrict: 7Federal Reserve Bank of: ChicagoFilings received during the week ending June 2, 2012FilerFiling TypeFiling ProposalEnd of Comment PeriodFIRST STATE BANK HOLDING COMPANY                                                                                        CICNotice by Mildred Stanley, Searsboro, Iowa, as trustee of the Warren Stanley Trust to retain control of 15.42 percent of First State Bank Holding Company, Lynnville, Iowa, and thereby indirectly First State Bank, Lynnville, Iowa.Newspaper: 06/15/2012Federal Register: 06/05/2012HEARTLAND FINANCIAL USA, INC.                                                                                           4c8Heartland Financial USA, Inc., Dubuque, Iowa, proposes to engage in the permissible nonbanking activities of leasing personal or real property, financial and investment advisory, and activities related to extending credit activities.Newspaper: Not applicableFederal Register: 06/21/2012
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-01965-BNB

JEREMY PINSON,

Applicant,

v.

BLAKE DAVIS, 

Respondent.

MINUTE ORDER

ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE BOYD N. BOLAND

In response to the Court’s August 4, 2011 Order Directing Applicant to Cure

Deficiencies, Applicant has submitted a Motion for Order to Provide Certified Statement 

requesting that the Court compel Respondent to furnish him with a six-month certified

account statement. Nothing Applicant has attached to the Motion verifies that prison

staff has refused to provide him with a certified copy of his account statement. 

Furthermore, Applicant also was instructed to provide a 28 U.S.C. § 1915 Motion and

Affidavit used in requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis in a habeas action,

which he has not submitted.

Accordingly, the Court shall grant Applicant an additional thirty days from the

date of this Minute Order to provide to the Court a certified trust fund account

statement showing only the current balance in his prisoner account, which is the

requirement in a habeas action, and to submit a § 1915 motion and affidavit used in

§ 2241 actions when seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The § 1915 Courtapproved form is available from Applicant’s case manager or the facility’s legal

assistance, along with applicable instructions, at www.cod.uscourts.gov. If Applicant

fails to submit a certified trust fund account statement, within thirty days from the

date of this Order, or to provide a verified statement by prison staff that they refuse

to provide to him a certified account statement or a § 1915 motion and affidavit the

action will be dismissed without prejudice and without further notice. Applicant’s Motion,

Doc. No. 3, is DENIED. 

Dated: September 9, 2011

Case 1:11-cv-01965-BNB Document 4 Filed 09/09/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
#### In the Matter of Walter C. Swift, Petitioner, against Louis J. Capozzoli, as a Judge of the Court of General Sessions, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County,

January 9, 1957.

*36
      *Walter G. Swift,*petitioner in person.

*Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney,*for respondent.

Samuel H. Hofstadter, J.

Motion to review the petitioner’s conviction in the Court of General Sessions of the crime of murder in the first degree for alleged errors committed during the trial is denied and the proceeding is dismissed. A proceeding under article 78 is not available (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1285). Moreover the petitioner’s conviction has already been affirmed on appeal (285 App. Div. 1135) and leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals has been denied by a Judge of that court.
##### 





Exhibit 21
  SUBSIDIARIES
    OF THE REGISTRANT
  Jurisdiction ofIncorporation orOrganizationSchawk Worldwide Holdings Inc.


United StatesSchawk Holdings, Inc.


United StatesSeven Seattle, Inc.


United StatesSchawk USA Inc.


United StatesSchawk LLC


United StatesSchawk de Mexico SRL de CV


MexicoSchawk Servicios Administrativos SRL de CV


MexicoMiramar Equipment, Inc.


United StatesSchawk Digital Solutions Inc.


United StatesKedzie Aircraft LLC


United StatesSeven Worldwide UK Ltd.


United KingdomWinnetts UK Ltd.


United KingdomSchawk Wace Group


United KingdomSchawk UK Holdings Ltd


United KingdomSeven Worldwide Ltd


United KingdomSchawk UK Ltd


United KingdomWace Wiltshire Ltd.


United KingdomGallions Estates Ltd


United KingdomSeven UK Corporate Packaging Ltd.


United KingdomSchawk UK Overseas Investments Ltd.


United KingdomSeven France Holdings SA


FranceSeven France SA


FranceSeven France Services SARL


FranceRipley Group Ltd.


United KingdomClyde Gravure Ltd.


United KingdomRiddington and Co. Ltd.


United KingdomRipley and Co. Ltd


United KingdomRipley Roll Lable Ltd.


United KingdomScrutton Speed Ltd.


United KingdomDulip Ltd


United KingdomReprographic Wace Group GMBH


GermanySchawk Canada, Inc.


CanadaProtopak Innovations, Inc.


CanadaSchawk Belgium BVBA


BelgiumSchawk Spain, SL


SpainSchawk Thailand Ltd.


ThailandAnthem Design & Consulting (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd.


ChinaSchawk Japan, Ltd.


JapanSchawk India Pty. Ltd.


IndiaSchawk Holdings Australia Pty Ltd.


AustraliaSchawk Australia Pty. Ltd.


AustraliaPerks Design Partners Pty Ltd


AustraliaSchawk Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd.


SingaporeAnthem Design Singapore Pte. Ltd.


SingaporeSchawk Labuan, Inc.


MalaysiaSchawk BVI Services, Inc.


British Virgin IslandsSchawk BVI Holdings, Inc.


British Virgin IslandsSchawk Imaging Sdn. Bhd.


MalaysiaSchawk Kuala Lumpur Sdn. Bhd.


MalaysiaSchawk Penang Sdn. Bhd.


MalaysiaSchawk Imaging (Shanghai) Co. Ltd.


ChinaLaserscan Technology(M) Sdn. Bhd.


Malaysia
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 31
                    RULE 13A-14(A) / 15D-14(A) CERTIFICATIONS

I, Haim Tsuff, Chief Executive and Principal Financial Officer of Isramco, Inc.,
certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Isramco, Inc. for the
year ended December 31, 2003;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and I have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such controls and
procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this annual report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this annual report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of the internal control
over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee
of registrant's board of directors (or persons fulfilling the equivalent
function):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: August 16, 2004



                                 /S/ HAIM TSUFF
                                 HAIM TSUFF
                                 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                 (AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 08-cr-110-PB

Robert A. Mason

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

trial scheduled for November 4, 2008, citing the need for

additional time to participate in an approved treatment program

at the Strafford County Department of Corrections and to complete

discovery and prepare a defense. The government does not object

to a continuance of the trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reasons and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from November 4, 2008 to March 3, 2009. In

agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds pursuant to 18

U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated reasons, the

ends of justice served in granting a continuance outweigh the

best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Case 1:08-cr-00110-PB Document 11 Filed 10/15/08 Page 1 of 2
2

The October 23, 2008 final pretrial conference is continued

to February 18, 2009 at 4:00 p.m.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

October 15, 2008

cc: Jeffrey Levin, Esq.

Arnold Huftalen, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:08-cr-00110-PB Document 11 Filed 10/15/08 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 99.2

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 Annual Report of Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending June 1, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert LaPenta, Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section  1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge 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 result of operations of the Company.



/s/  Robert LaPenta
Robert LaPenta
Vice President, Controller and
Chief Accounting Officer (Principal
Financial Officer )
August 27, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       7,933,346
<SECURITIES>                                 9,908,712
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,836,400
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (259,512)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            21,805,561
<PP&E>                                       5,577,704
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,915,025)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              26,100,385
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,053,502
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        76,278
<OTHER-SE>                                  21,856,866
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                26,100,385
<SALES>                                        174,142
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,243,017
<CGS>                                          247,006
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,039,669
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,807,177
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,460
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,357,732)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,357,732)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,357,732)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.18)
        

</TABLE>
#### The State of Ohio *v.*Turk. 

(No. 24919

Decided March 6, 1935.)

*Mr. Frank T. Gullitan,*prosecuting attorney, and *Mr. Thomas A. Burke, Jr.,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Frcmk G. Jones,*for defendant in error.

On consideration whereof Stephenson, Jones and Matthias, JJ., reach the conclusion that no prejudicial error has intervened, and that the judgment of the Court of Appeals should be affirmed on authority of *Robbins*v. *State,*8 Ohio St., 131. Weygandt, C. J., Day and Zimmerman, JJ., are of the opinion that the judgment of the Court of Appeals should be reversed and the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas affirmed. Williams, J., having sat by designation as a member of the Court of Appeals that heard and decided this case, and whose record is now before this court for consideration, does not participate. The court being thus equally divided in opinion as to the merits of the case, the entry of this fact constitutes an affirmance of the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Stephenson, Jones and Matthias, JJ., concur.

Williams, J., not participating.
| Skip to Content*Release Date: December 8, 2005*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**F.225 Life Insurance and Pension Fund Reserves** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|