alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                  EXHIBIT 12.1
                                  ------------

                            BREED TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
                       RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                        (IN MILLIONS, EXCEPT PER RATIOS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                             Fiscal Years Ended June 30,
                                     ---------------------------------------
                                      1994    1995     1996    1997     1998
                                     -----   -----    -----   -----    -----  
<S>                                  <C>     <C>      <C>     <C>      <C>
Earnings Computation
   Pre-tax earnings (losses) from
       continuing operations........  $73.0   $110.1  $ 98.3   $29.7    $(408.8)
   Add: Fixed charges...............    1.4      1.2     3.0    29.5       89.4
   Subtract: Capitalized Interest...     --       --      --    (0.1)      (0.1)
                                      -----   ------  ------   -----    -------
 
Total Earnings as Adjusted..........  $74.4   $111.3  $101.3   $59.0    $(319.5)
                                      =====   ======  ======   =====    =======
Fixed Charges Computation
   Interest expensed................    1.1      0.8     2.7    26.8       68.9
   Capitalized interest.............      -        -       -     0.1        0.1
   Amortization of deferred
       financing costs..............      -        -       -     0.7       16.8
   Estimated interest factor
       on operating leases..........    0.3      0.4     0.3     1.8        3.6
                                      -----   ------  ------   -----    -------
Total Fixed Charges.................  $ 1.4   $  1.2  $  3.0   $29.5    $  89.4
                                      =====   ======  ======   =====    =======
 
Ratio of earnings to
   fixed charges....................   52.3     92.7    33.8     2.0      (---)
                                      =====   ======  ======   =====    =======
 
Insufficiency of earnings to
   cover fixed charges..............                                    $(408.9)
                                                                        =======
</TABLE>

                                      -5-
{"@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 1, "item": {"@id": "http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@USDOTNHTSA", "name": "USDOTNHTSA"}}]}







































































































© 2024 Google LLC
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Tremaine Alexander, Appellant.

Submitted July 6, 2010;

decided August 26, 2010

Motion for an extension of the time within which to apply for *786permission to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 denied as unnecessary and motion papers treated as a timely CPL 460.20 application.
The District Court of the 20th Judicial District. County of Lake.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. THOMAS JAMES EVANS, Defendant.

CAUSE NO. DC-07-107 DECISION

On September 30, 2009, the defendant was sentenced as follows: Count I: Forty (40) years in the Montana State Prison, with twenty (20) years suspended for the offense of Sexual Intercourse Without Consent, a felony. The Court further ordered that the Defendant is not eligible for parole until he has completed an in-patient sexual offender treatment program.

On February 4, 2010, the defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

The defendant was present and was represented by Britt Cotter. The state was represented by Mark Russell.

Before hearing the application, the defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence *5or affirm it, but also increase it. The defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Sentence Review Division. The defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are sufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is clearly excessive in that the sentence appears disproportionate in light of sentences imposed with respect to similar offenses around the state. The defendant was relatively young at the time of the offense and it appeared from the psychosexual evaluation of the defendant that there is a relatively low risk to reoffend.

Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence shall be modified to twenty (20) years in the Montana State Prison, with ten (10) years suspended. The defendant shall complete Phases I and II of the Sex Offender Treatment Program prior to parole eligibility. The terms and conditions shall remain as imposed in the Judgment of the District Court dated September 30, 2009.

Done in open Court this 4th day of February, 2010.

DATED this 23rd day of February, 2010.

Chairperson, Hon. Blair Jones, Member, Hon. Richard Simonton and Member, Hon. Ray Dayton.
#### Susan Larabee et al., Respondents-Appellants, v Governor of the State of New York, Defendant, and New York State Senate et al., Appellants-Respondents. In the Matter of Edward A. Maron et al., Appellants, v Sheldon Silver, as Speaker of the State Assembly, et al., Respondents, et al., Respondent. Chief Judge of the State of New York et al., Appellants-Respondents, v Governor of the State of New York, Defendant, and Speaker of the New York State Assembly et al., Respondents-Appellants.

Submitted December 7, 2009;

decided December 15, 2009

Reported below, 58 AD3d 102; 65 AD3d 74; 65 AD3d 898.

Motion by Association of Justices of the Supreme Court of the State of New York et al. for leave to appear amici curiae on the appeals herein granted only to the extent that the proposed brief is accepted as filed. Two copies of the brief must be served and 24 copies filed within seven days.

Chief Judge Lippman taking no part.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 904 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 904

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 1560 Union Valley Road in West Milford, New Jersey, as the ``Brian 
                  P. Parrello Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 26, 2005

 Mr. Lautenberg (for himself and Mr. Corzine) introduced the following 
 bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland 
                   Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 1560 Union Valley Road in West Milford, New Jersey, as the ``Brian 
                  P. Parrello Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. BRIAN P. PARRELLO POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 1560 Union Valley Road in West Milford, New Jersey, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Brian P. Parrello Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Brian P. 
Parrello Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-1359

___________

United States, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * District of Nebraska.

*

Drew Brockevelt, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: December 28, 2007

Filed: January 10, 2008 (Corrected: 01/11/2008)

___________

Before MURPHY, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Drew Brockevelt challenges the reasonableness of the 27-month prison

sentence the district court imposed after he pleaded guilty to charges of (1) possessing

materials, shipped or transported in interstate commerce, which contained visual

depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 2252(a)(4)(B); and (2) criminal forfeiture of a computer and other property involved

in the commission of the offense, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2253. For reversal,

Brockevelt argues the district court improperly applied a presumption of

reasonableness to his advisory Guidelines imprisonment range, contrary to the

principles in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), as further explained in
-2-

Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2465 (2007), which was issued after

Brockevelt’s sentencing hearing.

Because it is unclear from the record whether or not the district court applied

a presumption of reasonableness to Brockevelt’s correctly calculated advisory

Guidelines imprisonment range, we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing

in light of Rita, 127 S. Ct. at 2465 (presumption of reasonableness accorded to

sentences reflecting proper applications of Guidelines applies only on appellate

review, not at sentencing). See United States v. Burns, 500 F.3d 756, 761 n.1 (8th Cir.

2007) (en banc) (following Rita, presumption of reasonableness exists only at

appellate level), petition for cert. filed, (U.S. Nov. 20, 2007) (No. 07-7805).

Brockevelt’s sentence is vacated, and the case is remanded for resentencing in

accordance with this opinion.

______________________________
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                                        5              
<MULTIPLIER>                                                 1,000
<CURRENCY>                                            U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                          OCT-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                           DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                               1.00
<CASH>                                                      11,341
<SECURITIES>                                                10,080
<RECEIVABLES>                                                    0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            22,167
<PP&E>                                                      14,722
<DEPRECIATION>                                             (10,750)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                              26,753
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                        7,620
<BONDS>                                                     13,985
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                        18
<OTHER-SE>                                                   5,130
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                26,753
<SALES>                                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                               875
<CGS>                                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             7,979
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                            (611)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                             (7,378)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                         (7,378)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                                (7,378)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 (.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                    0
        




</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 102 (Friday, May 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 25737]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12551]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8911-2]


Meeting of the Ozone Transport Commission

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency is 
announcing the 2009 Annual Meeting of the Ozone Transport Commission 
(OTC). This OTC meeting will explore options available for reducing 
ground-level ozone precursors in a multi-pollutant context.

DATES: The meeting will be held on June 10, 2009 starting at 9 a.m. 
(EDT) and ending at 5 p.m.
    Location: Holiday Inn BWI Airport, 890 Elkridge Landing Road, 
Linthicum, MD 21090; (410) 859-8400.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For documents and press inquiries 
contact: Ozone Transport Commission, 444 North Capitol Street NW., 
Suite 638, Washington, DC 20001; (202) 508-3840; e-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#701f0a1f1e15301f04131119025e1f0217"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="46293c29282306293225272f3468293421">[email protected]</span></a>; Web site: http://www.otcair.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 contain 
at Section 184 provisions for the ``Control of Interstate Ozone Air 
Pollution.'' Section 184(a) establishes an ``Ozone Transport Region'' 
(OTR) comprised of the States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, 
Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, 
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, parts of Virginia and the District 
of Columbia. The purpose of the Ozone Transport commission is to deal 
with ground-level ozone formation, transport, and control within the 
OTR.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Agenda: Copies of the final agenda will be available from the OTC 
office (202) 508-3840; by e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#98f7e2f7f6fdd8f7ecfbf9f1eab6f7eaff"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="523d283d3c37123d2631333b207c3d2035">[email protected]</span></a> or via the OTC Web 
site at http://www.otcair.org).

    Dated: May 21, 2009.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E9-12551 Filed 5-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
DISMISS and Opinion Filed June 9, 2021 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-00032-CV E-SYSTEMS CORPORATION, RONA LD FINLAYSON, AND DAVID ZISSKIND, Appellants V. LIQUID CAPITAL EXCH ANGE, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the 14th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-16142 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Partida-Kipness, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Garcia We reinstate this appeal. In July 20 18, we abated this case due to David Zisskind’s bankruptcy. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 8.2. The Court condu cted an independent review of the federal Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system which shows the bankruptcy case associated with this appeal was terminated on October 15, 2018, effectively dissolving the automatic stay. We notified the parties by letter dated May 7, 2021, requesting they inform the Court of the status of the bankruptcy and of this appeal. We cautioned that the–2– failure to respond would result in the appeal being dismissed for want of prosecution. See id . 42.3(b),(c). To date, no party has responded. Because we gave the parties an oppor tunity to show why we should not dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and no one responded, we dismiss this appeal. See id . 42.3(b), (c); The Tex. Ranger Oil Co. v. Alamo Fluids, Inc. , 2021 WL 1731795, at *1 (Tex. App.—D allas May 3, 2021, no pet. h.) (mem. op.).

180032F.P05 /Dennise Garcia/ DENNISE GARCIA JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
E-SYSTEMS CORPORATION, RONALD FINLAYSON, AND DAVID ZISSKIND, Appellants
No. 05-18-00032-CV V. LIQUID CAPITAL EXCHANGE, INC., Appellee On Appeal from the 14th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-16142. Opinion delivered by Justice Garcia. Justices Myers and Partida-Kipness participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opi nion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED

. Judgment entered June 9, 2021
<PAGE>


                                                                  EXHIBIT 23
                     CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-83160 and 33-06565) of Zoltek Companies,
Inc. of our report dated November 22, 2000 relating to the consolidated
financial statements of Zoltek Companies, Inc., which appears in this Form
10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated
November 22, 2000 relating to the financial statement schedule, which
appears in this Form 10-K.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
St. Louis, Missouri
December 28, 2000
exv10w10w1



 




Exhibit 10.10.1




[GUARANTY BANK AND TRUST LETTERHEAD]



September 24, 2004




Mr. Steven C. Robbins

Integrated Financial Systems, Inc.

7807 E. Peakview Avenue, Suite 300

Greenwood Village, CO 80111



Re: Renewal of Loan #8600025-001


Dear Mr. Robbins:



Guaranty Bank and Trust will
extend the above referenced line of credit for $5,000,000 to
February 7, 2005 at a rate of Wall Street Journal Prime plus 1%
with floor interest rate of 6%.



Please feel free to call if there are any questions.



Sincerely,



	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/ David R. Livingston
 	 	 
	David R. Livingston 	 	 
	President, Cherry Hills
**Exhibit 31.2**
**Certification**
I, Garrett E. Pierce, Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer, certifythat:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Orbital SciencesCorporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered bythis quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.        Date:  October 25, 2004 /s/ *Garrett E. Pierce*   Garrett E. Pierce   Vice Chairman and Chief FinancialOfficer
The District Court of the 4th Judicial District. County of Missoula.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, *16Plaintiff, vs. TYLER PEARCE, Defendant.

CAUSE NO. DC-06-488 AMENDED JUDGMENT AND COMMITMENT

On September 1, 2009, the defendant was sentenced for violation of the conditions of a deferred sentence as follows: Count I: A commitment to the Montana Department of Corrections for a term of twenty (20) years with fifteen (15) years suspended for the offense of Burglary, a felony; Count II: A commitment to the Montana Department of Corrections for a term of ten (10) years with five (5) years suspended for the offense of Theft, a felony; and Count III: A commitment to the Montana Department of Corrections for a term of ten (10) years with five (5) years suspended, for the offense of Criminal Mischief, a felony. Counts I, II and III shall run concurrently with each other.

On February 4, 2010, the defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

The defendant was present and was represented by Eric Olson. The state was not represented.

The Defendant having been duly informed of the amended judgment and commitment, and having waived his right to appear before the undersigned for this pronouncement of sentence, whereupon,

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the sentence shall be modified as follows: Count I: A commitment to the Montana Department of Corrections for a term of ten (10) years with five (5) years suspended; Count II: A commitment to the Montana Department of Corrections for a term of ten (10) years with five (5) years suspended; and Count III: A commitment to the Montana Department of Corrections for a term of ten (10) years with five (5) years suspended. Counts I, II and III shall run concurrently with each other. The terms and conditions shall remain as imposed in the Judgment of the District Court dated September 1, 2009.

DATED this 4th day of March, 2010.

Hon. Ray Dayton, District Court Judge.