alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
9528.

#### BLOODWORTH *v.*THE STATE.

1.' An instruction by the court, that "peach brandy, under the law, is' an intoxicating liquor,” was complained of as not authorized by evi-. dence. There was no merit in this ground of the motion for a new-trial.

2. The State having introduced direct evidence—that is,- a confession—as . well as circumstantial evidence of the defendant’s guilt, the court did not err, in the absence of a tim'ely written request, in failing to charge the jury the law of circumstantial evidence as embodied in the Penal Code, .§ 1010;- *Horton*v. *State,*21 *Ga. App.*120 (93 S. B. 1012, 1013), and eases therein cited.

3. The alleged newly discovered evidence was cumulative of that introduced by the defendant on the trial, and therefore affords no reason for .the grant of a new trial.

4. The evidence was sufficient to authorize the conviction of the defendant, the verdict was approved by the trial judge, *no*error of law appears, and this court will not interfere. Compare *Justice*v. *State,*7 *Ga. App.*43 (65 S. E. 1070); *White*v. *State,*18 *Ga. App.*214 (89 S. E. 175). ' '

Decided April 2, 1918.

Indictment for manufacturing intoxicating liquor; from Pike superior court—Judge Searcy. January 16, 1918.

*II. O. Farr, H. .A. Rider,*for plaintiff in error.

*F. M. Owen, solicitor-general,*contra.

*133Harwell, J.

The defendant was indicted for manufacturing intoxicating liquors. The evidence for the State showed- that in ah out-housé in the yard where defendant lived was found some peach “mobby” and a box with a pipe' running through it, a lard can that had been recently used, and a trough in connection with the pipe. The pipe was covered with sand, which was wet, as if he had poured water on it. The peach “mobby” was hot, as if it had just been taken from the _fire. The chief of police testified that he would call the outfit a liquor apparatus. The testimony further showed that the pipe had the smell of liquor about it. The officers who made the arrest testified that the peaches were canned peaches, and that they» found at or near the place 15.0 empty peach cans. It was further testified that the defendant said: “He was not selling whisky but was making it for his own use. We were discussing the outfit I found the night before. Something was said about making liquor at his house. Lee said he was making a little for his own use, just to drink.” The defendant denied that he, was making liquor, and said that the peaches were some sour canned peaches which had been given to'him, and that he was heating them for the purpose of slopping his hogs.

The headnotes do not require elaboration.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Broyles, P. *J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.*
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 785

AN ACT

To designate the J. Phil Campbell, Senior, Natural

Resource Conservation Center.
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 785

AN ACT

To designate the J. Phil Campbell, Senior, Natural Resource

Conservation Center.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 785 EH

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF J. PHIL CAMPBELL, SENIOR,

2 NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION CEN3 TER.

4 The Southern Piedmont Conservation Research Cen5 ter located at 1420 Experimental Station Road in

6 Watkinsville, Georgia, shall be known and designated as

7 the ‘‘J. Phil Campbell, Senior, Natural Resource Con8 servation Center’’.

9 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

10 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

11 paper, or other record of the United States to the building

12 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

13 to the ‘‘J. Phil Campbell, Senior, Natural Resource Con14 servation Center’’.

Passed the House of Representatives April 8, 1997.

Attest:

Clerk.
9239.

#### Parsons *v.*Wilson.

Wade, C. <7.

1. “Although the pleadings may not present the whole issue, yet if it be fully made by the evidence without objection, it is too late, after verdict for the' losing party, to make that the ground of a motion for a new trial.” *Howard*v. *Barrett,*52 *Ga.*15. See also Gaines*ville &c. R. Co.*v. *Galloway,*17 *Ga. App.*702 (4) (87 S. E. 1093), and cases there cited.

(a) There is therefore no merit in the contention that the verdict was contrary to law because, in the absence of any pleadings to that effect, testimony was heard at the trial to sustain a claim of set-olf advanced by the defendant;'for it appears that the testimony offered for this purpose by the defendant was not only not objected to. by the plaintiff, but he likewise testified in regard thereto, denying the existence of the defendant’s demand. The issue was thus presented and passed upon.

(b) There was testimony to support the verdict.

2. The only special ground of the motion for a new trial is based upon alleged newly discovered evidence, and the court did not err in declining to consider this evidence and refusing the motion based thei-eon. *280The alleged newly discovered evidence was that of three persons to the effect that the plaintiff was living in the town of Chatsworth during the early part of the year 1916, in the winter, and was in business there at that time. At the trial the plaintiff himself testified that he “was in business in Chatsworth in the winter,”—the same, winter, and therefore was not boarding at the home of the defendant. It is apparent that the alleged newly discovered evidence is merely cumulative, since testimony was heard to the same general effect. Besides, one of the newly discovered witnesses made affidavit that he was in business With the plaintiff during his stay in Chatsworth; and, this fact being necessarily known to the plaintiff, it is obvious that he did not exercise ordinary diligence in failing to discover this witness at least.

Decided May 14, 1918.

Lien foreclosure; from Murray superior court—Judge Tarver. September 8, 1917.

*II. II. Anderson, Maddox McOamy & Shumate,*for plaintiff.

*William E. Mann,*for defendant.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Jenkins and Luke, JJ., concur.*
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Roxana Bardan","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/dbardan\/","title":"NASA\u2019s SpaceX Crew-4 Astronauts to Discuss Mission, Splashdown","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"6ayDYB4LDm\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasas-spacex-crew-4-astronauts-to-discuss-mission-splashdown\/\">NASA\u2019s SpaceX Crew-4 Astronauts to Discuss Mission, Splashdown<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasas-spacex-crew-4-astronauts-to-discuss-mission-splashdown\/embed\/#?secret=6ayDYB4LDm\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA\u2019s SpaceX Crew-4 Astronauts to Discuss Mission, Splashdown” — NASA\" data-secret=\"6ayDYB4LDm\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/crew_4_aboard_iss.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Access Worldwide Communications, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the Report), I, John Hamerski, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                                                 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    RICHARD A. LYEW                                                                                                           
|Richard A. Lyew Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (principal financial and accounting
officer) August 15, 2005
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Danny Baird","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/dsbaird\/","title":"28. DSN – Explore Tomorrow | NASA’s The Invisible Network Podcast","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"S6yC8xM4bV\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/podcasts\/invisible-network\/28-deep-space-network-explore-tomorrow-nasas-the-invisible-network-podcast\/\">28. DSN – Explore Tomorrow | NASA’s The Invisible Network Podcast<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/podcasts\/invisible-network\/28-deep-space-network-explore-tomorrow-nasas-the-invisible-network-podcast\/embed\/#?secret=S6yC8xM4bV\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“28. DSN – Explore Tomorrow | NASA’s The Invisible Network Podcast” — NASA\" data-secret=\"S6yC8xM4bV\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/in_socialmedia.png?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":338}
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

IN RE: BARD IVC FILTERS 

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION 

Myra Edwards, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

C. R. Bard, Inc., and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc. 

 Defendants. 

__________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

No. MDL-15-02641-PHX-DGC 

Civil Action No.: CV15-02090-PHX DGC 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff, Myra Edwards, has filed a motion to withdraw Plaintiff’s amended 

complaint. Doc. 734. 

IT IS ORDERED that the motion (Doc. 734) is granted. Plaintiff’s amended complaint 

(Doc. 702) is withdrawn. 

 Dated this 17th day of February, 2016. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 849 Filed 02/17/16 Page 1 of 1
#### Elizabethtown *&*Paducah Ry. Co. *v.*Geo. Stickler.

Eminent Domain — Criterion of Damages.

K. assessed his land at about $20.00 per acre. The railroad company took three acres and cut off about fifteen from the main land. Held, that a judgment in damages for $464.00 is excessive.

APPEAL EROM HARDIN CIRCUIT COURT.

April 23, 1872.

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Lindsay:

It seems to this court that the judgment in this case 'ought not to be allowed to stand. Stickler assessed his tract of land at about twenty dollars per acre. Allowing it to be worth double that amount, the three acres taken by the railway company would be worth $120.00. The fifteen acres separated from the main tract by the road would be worth $600. The judgment is for *447$464, more than three-fifths of the entire value of the three acres taken, and the fifteen acres cut off by the road, and greatly exceeding the entire value thereof according to the assessment by appellee when acting under oath.

*Pindellj for appellants.*

Montgomery, *for appellee.*

Testing the measure of recovery by the rule laid down in the case of the Appellant herein, vs. Helm’s Heirs, this day decided, it is manifest that the damages allowed appellee are unreasonable and excessive.

Wherefore the judgment must be reversed. The cause is remanded for a new trial, upon the principles laid down in the opinion of this court in the above named case.
9962.

#### Williamson *v.*The State.

Decided November 1, 1918.

Indictment for manufacture of intoxicating liquor; from Carroll superior court—Judge Terrell. June 3, 1918.

*Smith & Smith,*for plaintiff in error.

*O. E. Boop, solicitor-general,*contra.

Bloodworth, J.

In this ease there was direct evidence to connect the ‘ defendant with the crime charged. “It is only where a case is wholly dependent upon the law of circumstantial evidence that the trial judge is required to give the law of circumstantial evidence.” The indictment being supported by direct as well as circumstantial evidence, it was not erroneous for the court to fail to charge the law of circumstantial evidence. *Nobles*v. *State,*127 *Ga.*212 (56 S. E. 125); *Lockett*v. *State,*20 *Ga. App.*180 (92 S. E. 948); *Ponder*v. *State,*18 *Ga. App. 703*(6), 704 (90 S. E. 365).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, P. J., and Harwell, J., concur.*
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Guillermo Sotelo, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CR-16-00107-PHX-DLR

ORDER OF DETENTION

Defendant appeared before this Court on a Petition for Revocation of Supervised

Release. The issue of detention was submitted to the Court. The Court considered the

Petition and file in determining whether defendant should be released on conditions set by

the Court.

The Court finds that defendant has failed to carry his burden of establishing that he

does not pose a serious flight risk or danger to any other person or to the community pursuant

to Rule 32.1(a)(6), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

The Court concludes, by a preponderance of the evidence, that defendant is a serious

flight risk and that there is no condition or combination of conditions that will reasonably

assure his appearance at future proceedings.

The Court also concludes, by a preponderance of the evidence, that defendant is a

danger and that there is no condition or combination of conditions that will reasonably assure

the safety of the community.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendant be detained pending further

proceedings.

DATED this 2nd day of January, 2019
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"NASA\u2019s Weekly Video Clips Feature Research by Astronauts, Station Reconfiguration Work","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"yqj5fvzue2\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasas-weekly-video-clips-feature-research-by-astronauts-station-reconfiguration-work\/\">NASA\u2019s Weekly Video Clips Feature Research by Astronauts, Station Reconfiguration Work<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasas-weekly-video-clips-feature-research-by-astronauts-station-reconfiguration-work\/embed\/#?secret=yqj5fvzue2\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA\u2019s Weekly Video Clips Feature Research by Astronauts, Station Reconfiguration Work” — NASA\" data-secret=\"yqj5fvzue2\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/nasa-logo-web-rgb_0.gif?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":300}
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S. SECTION 1350, AS
                         ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned chief executive officer of Tom's
Foods Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:

(1) the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the twelve weeks ended June
19, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of
and for the periods presented in the Report.

Dated: August 3, 2004



                                   /s/ Rolland G. Divin
                                   --------------------------------------------
                                   Name:  Rolland G. Divin
                                   Title: President and Chief Executive Officer
10090.

#### Gray *v.*The State.

Decided November 1, 1918.

Indictment for assault with intent to murder; from Toombs superior court—Judge Hardeman. June 25, 1918.

*Williams & Corbitt,*for plaintiff in error.

*Walter F. Gray, solicitor-general,*contra.

Broyles, P. J.

The only point argued in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error is that the court erred in overruling the defendant’s motion for a continuance on account, of absent witnesses. The proceedings upon the hearing of the motion are reported in extenso in the record, and it does not affirmatively appear that the trial judge abused his wide discretion in overruling the motion. '

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bloodworth and Harwell, JJ., concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001048407
<NAME>                        ENERGY VENTURES INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         227,431
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  38,192
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               523,543
<PP&E>                                         760,727
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,284,270
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,044,273
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       1,296
<OTHER-SE>                                     238,701
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,284,270
<SALES>                                        200,025
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               200,025
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,025,124
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (1,825,099)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             28,787
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,825,099)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,825,099)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.143)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.143)



</TABLE>