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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           2,424
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,225
<ALLOWANCES>                                       694
<INVENTORY>                                     11,009
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,751
<PP&E>                                          15,696
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,759
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  56,280
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,589
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            13
<OTHER-SE>                                      45,771
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    56,280
<SALES>                                         47,704
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                47,704
<CGS>                                           14,542
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,542
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                32,621
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   392
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 114
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,630
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,630
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,630
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.12<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.11
<FN>
<F1>For purposes of this exhibit, primary means basic.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
No. 968.

#### Massachusetts Hair & Felt Co. *v.*B. F. Sturtevant Co.

March 30, 1942.

*Mr. Wm. S. Hodges*for petitioner. *Messrs. Melvin R. Jenney*and *Harry Dexter Peck*for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
One 'No,

x “i
: 5
a
MN er
G comN

May 3, 2012

Notice of Regulatory Review Schedule
Dear Tribal Chairman:

On behalf of the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC or Commission), we invite you to
participate in a consultation meeting on the Notice of Regulatory Review Schedule Group Three
regulations. Specifically, we seek input on the following regulations:

Group 3:
(a) Part 543 — Minimum Internal Control Standards for Class II Gaming; and
(b) Part 547— Minimum Technical Standards for Gaming Equipment Used with the
play of Class II Games.

This schedule is the result of the NIGC’s review and consideration of comments received in
response to the Notice of Inquiry published on November 18, 2010 and subsequent Notice of
Regulatory Review Agenda published on April 4, 2011 in the Federal Register. We know that the
best results can be achieved after meaningful consultation with Indian tribes and we look forward
to your participation.

The NIGC recognizes and respects the sovereignty of Indian tribes and the government-to-
government relationship that exists between the United States and tribal governments.
Accordingly, the NIGC is committed to implementing the President’s November 5, 2009
Executive Memorandum on Tribal Consultation with Indian tribes and Executive Order 13175
prior to and during any rulemaking process.

As such, we invite all Tribal leaders to share their views with the Commission on Groups One
and Three regulations at a consultation scheduled for June 7, 2012 in Green Bay, WI, from 9 a.m.
to 4 p.m., at the following location:

Radisson Hotel & Conference Center
2040 Airport Drive

Iroquois Room

Green Bay, WI

For those Tribal leaders unable to attend this consultation, we invite you to submit written
comments by e-mail to reg.review@nige.gov, or by U.S. mail to National Indian Gaming
Commission, Attn: Regulatory Review, 1441 L Street, NW. Suite 9100, Washington, DC 20005.

The Commission intends to post comments received and transcripts of each consultation on the
NIGC website under the heading “Tribal Consultation,” on the left-hand side of the NIGC home

page, www.nige.gov.

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS 1441 L St. NW, Suite 9100, Washington, DC 20005 Tel: 202.632.7003 Fax: 202.632.7066 WWW.NIGC.cov

REGIONAL OFFICES Portland, OR; Sacramento, CA; Phoenix, AZ; St. Paul, MN; Tulsa, OK


For planning purposes, and to accommodate all who want to attend the consultation, please RSVP
to Rita Homa, Executive Secretary, at (202) 418-9807 or by e-mail at

consultation.rsvp@nige.gov. Information regarding the time and location of each tribal
consultation will be posted on our website.

We are committed to working together on a government-to-government basis to maximize the
results of this regulatory review process. We look forward to meeting with you should your

schedule allow.

Thank you for your interest and participation in this regulatory review process.

Sincerely,
EE, Ssafuu'f Cochise: Ly Th S
Tracie L. Stevens Steffani A. Cochran Daniel J. Little

Chairwoman Vice-Chairwoman Associate Commissioner
----

Exhibit 32.2 

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

I, Michael Ash, CFO of The Tirex Corporation (the "Company")do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge: 

1.   This Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the period endedDecember 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the"report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

2.   The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

/s/  Michael Ash      Michael Ash, CFO

Date: February 06, 2007

----
CATALINA LIGHTING, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                                   EXHIBIT 11
          SCHEDULE OF COMPUTATION OF DILUTED EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE
                      (In thousands, except per share data)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                             Three Months Ended              Six Months Ended
                                                                  March 31,                      March 31,
                                                          -----------------------         -----------------------
                                                            2001            2000            2001           2000
                                                          -------         -------         -------         -------
<S>                                                       <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>
Net income (loss) for diluted earnings per share          $(3,368)        $   752         $(5,267)        $ 1,289

Interest on convertible subordinated notes, net of
  income taxes                                                 --              90              --             186
                                                          -------         -------         -------         -------
Net income (loss) for diluted earnings per share          $(3,368)        $   842         $(5,267)        $ 1,475
                                                          =======         =======         =======         =======


Weighted average number of common shares
   outstanding for the period                               8,000           7,460           8,000           7,426

Weighted average number of shares repurchased
   for the period                                            (642)           (529)           (642)           (464)

Shares issuable upon conversion of convertible
   subordinated notes                                          --           1,083              --           1,115

Common equivalent shares determined
   using the "Treasury Stock" method

   representing shares issuable upon exercise
   of stock options and warrants and shares
   issuable under contractual agreements                       --             747              --             753
                                                          -------         -------         -------         -------

Weighted average number of shares
  used in calculation of diluted earnings
  per share                                                 7,358           8,761           7,358           8,830
                                                          =======         =======         =======         =======

Diluted earnings (loss) per share                         $ (0.46)        $  0.10         $ (0.72)        $  0.17
                                                          =======         =======         =======         =======
</TABLE>
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

TO THE 290TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF BEXAR COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas on March 18l, 2015, the cause upon appeal to

revise or reverse your judgment between

Stephanie M. Trejo, Appellant(s)

V.

The State of Texas, Appellee(s)

No. 04-14-00731-CR and Tr. Ct. No. 2014CR0086W

was determined, and therein our Court of Appeals made its order in these words:

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is

DISMISSED.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Fourth

District of Texas, in this behalf and in all things have the order duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

Witness the Hon. Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas,

with the seal of the Court affixed and the City of San Antonio on May 19, 2015.

KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK

Cynthia A. Martinez

Deputy Clerk, Ext. 53853
##### 



PB DRAFT 11/15/04 Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Timothy A. Larkin, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Warren Resources,
Inc.;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 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
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I are 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 have:  (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; and(c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting;  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over the financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and
the audit committee of registrants board of directors:  (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. /s/ Timothy A. LarkinTimothy A. Larkin,Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
 December 7, 2004 A signed original of this original statement required by Section 302 has been provided to Warren
Resources, Inc., and will be retained by Warren Resources, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 4
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Darnell Leader, Appellant.

Submitted March 21, 2011;

decided March 24, 2011

Motion for an extension of the time within which to apply for permission to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 granted and motion papers treated as a timely CPL 460.20 application.
#### Julian Edward ROCHESTER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; T. Travis Medlock, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents—Appellees.

No. 09-6423.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 21, 2009.

Decided: May 5, 2009.

Julian Edward Rochester, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Julian Edward Rochester appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion. Because Rochester failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. *Rochester v. South Carolina Dept. of Corrections,*No. 3:93-cv-02670-WBT (D.S.C. Feb. 23, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2822 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide additional tax 

relief for small businesses, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 1, 2009 

Ms. SNOWE (for herself and Ms. LANDRIEU) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

additional tax relief for small businesses, and for other 

purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT OF 1986 CODE; 

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

5 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Business Ex6 pensing Permanency Act’’. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2822 IS

1 SEC. 2. PERMANENT INCREASE IN LIMITATIONS ON EX2 PENSING OF CERTAIN DEPRECIABLE BUSI3 NESS ASSETS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (b) of section 179 of 

5 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to limita6 tions) is amended— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘$25,000’’ and all that follows 

8 in paragraph (1) and inserting ‘‘$250,000.’’, 

9 (2) by striking ‘‘$200,000’’ and all that follows 

10 in paragraph (2) and inserting ‘‘$800,000’’, 

11 (3) by striking ‘‘after 2007 and before 2011, 

12 the $120,000 and $500,000’’ in paragraph (5)(A) 

13 and inserting ‘‘after 2009, the $250,000 and the 

14 $800,000’’, 

15 (4) by striking ‘‘2006’’ in paragraph (5)(A)(ii) 

16 and inserting ‘‘2008’’, and 

17 (5) by striking paragraph (7). 

18 (b) PERMANENT EXPENSING OF COMPUTER SOFT19 WARE.—Section 179(d)(1)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue 

20 Code of 1986 (defining section 179 property) is amended 

21 by striking ‘‘and before 2011’’. 

22 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

23 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

24 December 31, 2008. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997             SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998             MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         353,935                 667,420
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   56,139                 297,897
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               410,074                 965,317
<PP&E>                                       2,086,439               1,111,422
<DEPRECIATION>                               (438,369)               (257,081)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,058,144               1,819,658
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          104,288                   1,060
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        35,900                  35,900
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,917,956               1,782,698
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,058,144               1,819,658
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,173,300               1,070,853
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  798,382                 565,659
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0                       0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   149,000                 195,200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   242,354                 318,625
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 273 Considered and Passed Senate (CPS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 273

 To require the designation of the federally occupied building located 
at McKinley Avenue and Third Street, S.W., Canton, Ohio, as the ``Ralph 
            Regula Federal Office Building and Courthouse''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 15, 2009

Mr. Reid (for Mr. Brown (for himself and Mr. Voinovich)) introduced the 
following bill; which was read twice, considered, read the third time, 
                               and passed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require the designation of the federally occupied building located 
at McKinley Avenue and Third Street, S.W., Canton, Ohio, as the ``Ralph 
            Regula Federal Office Building and Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. RALPH REGULA FEDERAL OFFICE BUILDING AND COURTHOUSE.

    (a) Designation.--The Administrator of General Services shall 
ensure that the federally occupied building located at McKinley Avenue 
and Third Street, S.W., Canton, Ohio, is known and designated as the 
``Ralph Regula Federal Office Building and Courthouse''.
    (b) References.--During the period in which the building referred 
to in subsection (a) is federally occupied, any reference in a law, 
map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States 
to that building shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Ralph 
Regula Federal Office Building and Courthouse''.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 21.1**

 

CREDENCE SYSTEMS CORPORATION 

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY 

 

The following are certain wholly-owned or majority-owned subsidiaries of Credence Systems Corporation as of January 24, 2004: 

 

Credence Capital Corporation, a California corporation (a wholly owned subsidiary of Credence Systems Corporation); 

 

Credence Europa Limited, a private limited company in the United Kingdom;

 

Credence International Limited, Inc., a Delaware corporation;

 

Credence Systems Europe GmbH, a German corporation (a whollyowned subsidiary of Credence Europa Limited); 

 

Credence SystemsKK, a Japanese company; 

 

Credence Systems Korea, a South Koreacompany (a wholly owned subsidiary of Credence International Limited, Inc.); 

 

Credence-SZ Systems GmbH, a German corporation; 

 

Credence-SZ Japan, a Japanese corporation; 

 

Credence France SARL, a French company (a wholly owned subsidiary of Credence Management Europe AG); 

 

and 

 

Optonics, Inc., a California corporation.